Challenging court and attys fees request

[BelleMere]

This case takes place in Louisiana and all parties reside here. in 2001 BM tried to kill my two minor stepchildren, then ages 10 (SD) and 12 (SS). BM pleaded guilty to attempted manslaughter and received 15 yrs for each count, served concurrently, in a separate county from ours.

Through CPS, DH and I both received legal and physical custody of both children. Fast forward to last year - BM still in jail, minimal contact by letter between BM and the kids for about 4.5 years. My stepdaughter (15) asked me to adopt her and so I hired a lawyer to make that happen (I adopted SS too but since he's 17 it was a notarial adoption).

We asked BM to terminate her rights voluntarily, which initially she refused to do, even tho the kids also asked her to let them go. After about 6 months of exchanges with her which were not productive, we began termination proceedings in family court based on a law here that says trying to kill your own children is grounds for involuntary termination.

The law also provides that a defendant who is impoverished can request the court appoint a lawyer to fight termination, which BM did (and provided the paperwork to show she has very little money in the commissary or wahtever jail acct she has). The lawyer fussed and hassled, got BM to sign the termination agreement and then held on to it for a few months while she (the lawyer) called for many more hearings on the matter, challenging everything from the grounds for termination to the original custody settlement. Eventually she handed the signed termination over after I made some concessions in order to get it, like agreeing to send photos and updates to BM. Fine. Whatever.

Now the court appointed lawyer wants me to pay her fees, which are far higher than even my own lawyer's fees. We have a hearing Sept 6. My lawyer wants me present to give a kind of sob story as to the burden we have had to bear all these years as BM hasn't provided ANY support at all and we've been raising two very emotionally damaged kids, and that this is further taking food out of the kids' mouths (true, since we didn't exactly budget for a second lawyer). The question is:

1. How would you go about arguing that you (if you were me) should not be made responsible for the fees? Isn't the presumption that a court appointed lawyer, where the law provides an impoverished defendat with a lawyer, will be paid by the state or the court or, at most, equivalent to the court rates (about $25/hr)?

2. Also, in Lousiana, it is expected that lawyers will do a certain amt of pro bono work every year - how would you work that in to the argument? or should I just file a complaint with the Bar and be done?

3. I think I could show that BM is not, in fact, impoverished - perhaps through affidavits related to the contents of her storage unit or following the money trail (MAYBE $2-3K out there somewhere). Is this worth it and would it, if successcul, in fact, invalidate the entire effort since those were the grounds on which her lawyer was appointed and we moved forward?

[socrateaser]

>The question is:
>
>1. How would you go about arguing that you (if you were me)
>should not be made responsible for the fees? Isn't the
>presumption that a court appointed lawyer, where the law
>provides an impoverished defendat with a lawyer, will be paid
>by the state or the court or, at most, equivalent to the court
>rates (about $25/hr)?

First, you haven't stated the argument that opposing counsel is using to justify the right to have the fees made payable to you. I can give you a stock answer, but if you want something useful, then you'll need to post the contents of the pleading arguing for the fees.

>
>2. Also, in Lousiana, it is expected that lawyers will do a
>certain amt of pro bono work every year - how would you work
>that in to the argument? or should I just file a complaint
>with the Bar and be done?

>3. I think I could show that BM is not, in fact, impoverished
>- perhaps through affidavits related to the contents of her
>storage unit or following the money trail (MAYBE $2-3K out
>there somewhere). Is this worth it and would it, if
>successcul, in fact, invalidate the entire effort since those
>were the grounds on which her lawyer was appointed and we
>moved forward?

All of your above arguments are interesting, however I suspect that they will not be near as relevant as the simple argument that a request for attorney fees is an action "in equity," and as the opposing party comes to the court with "unclean hands," because she attempted to murder the real parties in interest in the case, the court should not grant a request for attorney fees.

And, anticipating that appointed counsel argues that the state is the real party in interest for the purposes of attorney fees, because that is whom is paying the bill, your response would be that, were the state representing the children's interests in the matter, then the state would have a valid interest in being reimbursed for attorney fees. But, as the state is representing the other party, it is that party who's inequitable acts are the subject matter of the case, and the fact that the state is paying the attorney fees as a third party, due to some legislative enactment, does not alter the actual character of the representation, which is that it is the opposing party's whose inequitable acts in the transaction before the court which are in the balance.

Once again, however, this is a stock answer. There may, and almost certainly are, because this is LA, which has different laws from all other jurisdictions, due to its origination in the civil law of France vs. English common law, more appropriate arguments for this case. Without reading the actual pleading of opposing counsel, I am just guessing at a response.