Patrick J. McMenamin | Bucks & Montgomery County Family Lawyer | Pennsylvania

Earlier this year I was successful in obtaining for my client primary physical custody of his son. He had sought for some time to obtain primary custody inasmuch as the child's mother neglected the child educationally and emotionally. After putting together a concise plan as to how to prepare the case, and then putting that plan into action, we were ultimately successful in winning the case for the client and obtaining custody for the father. In a criminal case last fall we were successful in obtaining a dismissal of all charges on behalf of a client who was charged simply because a car, registered to him, was involved in an accident. Late at night the car was involved in a rear end collision on a local road. The driver who was rear-ended never saw who was driving the car, but was able to obtain the license plate number of the striking vehicle. The police later found the car abandoned in a neighboring town. The police contacted the client who first called our law office. The police were angry that the client would not provide a statement indicating who was driving the car when the accident occurred, and so they charged the client as the registered owner of the vehicle. The Court agreed with our argument that if the police had no evidence that our client was driving the car they had no evidence that linked our client to the hit-and-run accident, and the charges were dismissed.

A successful law practice is built on communication, honesty, hard work and knowledge of the legal system. Communication: the client has the right to speak with his or her lawyer and the right to know what is going with the case. The lawyer should keep the client apprised of all developments and should strive to fully and completely explain all the alternatives and options at the client's disposal. Honesty: the lawyer should always be honest with the client in providing options and advice and should never be dishonest as to the status of the case and likely outcome. The client has the right to know the truth so that educated decisions can be made. Hard work: the client has the right to have the lawyer prepared for all court proceedings, to respond to all inquiries, and to prepare the case appropriately. Knowledge of the legal system: the client has the right to be represented by an attorney who is familiar with the type of law, the court system and the local procedures. It is for that reason that our practice is limited to Bucks, Montgomery and Lehigh counties. A successful law practice is built upon these four traits.

Clients should seek a lawyer with whom they feel comfortable and compatible. Clients should always feel that they can call the lawyer and receive honest answers and advice to their questions. Clients should never hire a lawyer with whom they do not feel comfortable and to whom they are not willing to be honest and open with respect to what has occurred and the relevant facts. If the potential client feels uncomfortable with the lawyer they most certainly should not hire that professional. Clients should always feel as if the lawyer has an interest in their case and that the lawyer is diligently seeking the best possible outcome for the client.

Local knowledge is crucial to the outcome of most cases. The lawyer should know the opposing attorneys, if possible, should know the local procedure and should note that the judges. A successful outcome cannot be attained if the lawyer is unfamiliar with local customs and procedures or is not aware of what it is the judge or the jury will be considering important and relevant to the case.

During an initial telephone consultation the lawyer should be able to tell the client in general how the case will proceed through the court system, the potential outcomes, and the potential representation that can be provided by the lawyer and his staff. The lawyer should be able to provide to the potential client in the initial telephone conversation a basic understanding of what lies ahead for the client's travels through the legal system.

During an initial telephone consultation the client should be prepared to provide a basic summary of what the case is about and what the client seeks in terms of an outcome. A detailed in-depth summary is generally not helpful in an initial telephone consultation as to many facts allow the telephone consultation to bog down and to contain too many answers and too many explanations thus preventing the client from making an educated decision as to whether or not to use their important time to meet with a lawyer face-to-face.

My background, experience, care and concern are what differentiate me from other lawyers in the community. I am always willing to speak with an individual who calls the office and to provide basic information. I providing free consultation so that the client can make an educated decision whether they want to retain my services. Car dealerships do not charge people to walk the lot or take a test drive so as to make an educated decision whether to buy an automobile. So too, legal clients have the right to get basic questions answered and to determine whether they feel comfortable with the lawyer so that they can make an educated decision whether or not they are important legal matter will be handled by someone with whom they feel comfortable and in whom they trust. This level of understanding of the attorney-client relationship is what differentiates me from other lawyers in the community.

The most rewarding aspect of my job is being able to help people who have serious legal problems.

Outside of my legal practice I have an interest in community service, local scouting programs, and local youth swimming and running programs. I am a member of Rotary International which is a worldwide community service organization. I have previously been recognized for my dedication and service to the local community.

• Montgomery Bar Association
  National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys
  Rotary International

• Cliff Dochterman Award for Community Service, International Fellowship of Scouting Rotarians

• Holmes v. Lankenau Hospital, 426 Pa.Super. 452, 627 A.2d 763 (1993). Wiedinmyer v. Harleysville Mutual Insurance Company, 42 D. & C. 4th 204 (1999).

• Facebook
• Google +
• Lawyer Central
• For More Information About Patrick McMenamin
• Avvo.com