Denine is a smart energetic lawyer with a broad talent and skill set to bring to any case. When she argues, she truly does have your best interest at heart. She can easily visualize your case. She puts together the pieces well. She readily anticipates what the opposition is going to do next. When she says she's going to deliver something, she does. Denine has a very pleasant court-room demeanor and that demeanor plays well with Judges who like agreeing with her. She is keen on finer logic paths within the law. You will see her paint a very clear: if this is true, this is true and this is true, then you must know that this is true – like a good lawyer should. What Denine lacks is the ability to argue past the law and into leverage. This is her fatal flaw. Allow me to explain. If you have a straight forward case where the path to victory rests in the strict application of the law, she’s your lawyer. However she is blind to what is in your ultimate best interest. Some lawyers are good at seeing the strategic nature of a case and helping their client’s put together the facts and push for your present position and future desired state. If you tell Denine, “I want a divorce.” She will give you one. If you tell her, I want to pay $3000 to settle, she will get you there. But what she lacks is the ability to see how you will be hurt by her client’s flawed concept of the child support arrangement. She lacks the ability to improvise, adjust and improve on your case, when her client’s idea is that $3000 will cover the claim, but in fact, it is out of ignorance that you asked for $3000. You needed $30,000.00 and even though she might know you need $30,000.00, she has this ethos that will only let her argue for $3000. (This was a painful lesson to learn.) If Denine were to combine her gifts with empathy, I think she could be a very good attorney in family court. She might even make champion status. What is that? A lawyer who is a champion, is a lawyer who believes an attorney not only argues a case, but leaves their client in a better state than even the client expects. Addendum: Understand the economics of your case before you judge your lawyer too harshly. If your lawyer sees that the best outcome would cost $20k of their billable time, and you only have $10k. Make sure they at least advise you of what you get for what you pay. Lawyers don’t trust that clients will write them a check if they tell them the truth. Denine is a rare gem in this regard. She answers your questions, delivers the goods, and is patient with your learning curve. She is incapable of deception. So do your homework and set your expectations high. She will rise to the occasion or tell you that you need more money.

Denine is a smart energetic lawyer with a broad talent and skill set to bring to any case. When she argues, she truly does have your best interest at heart. She can easily visualize your case. She puts together the pieces well. She readily anticipates what the opposition is going to do next. When she says she's going to deliver something, she does. Denine has a very pleasant court-room demeanor and that demeanor plays well with Judges who like agreeing with her. She is keen on finer logic paths within the law. You will see her paint a very clear: if this is true, this is true and this is true, then you must know that this is true – like a good lawyer should. What Denine lacks is the ability to argue past the law and into leverage. This is her fatal flaw. Allow me to explain. If you have a straight forward case where the path to victory rests in the strict application of the law, she’s your lawyer. However she is blind to what is in your ultimate best interest. Some lawyers are good at seeing the strategic nature of a case and helping their client’s put together the facts and push for your present position and future desired state. If you tell Denine, “I want a divorce.” She will give you one. If you tell her, I want to pay $3000 to settle, she will get you there. But what she lacks is the ability to see how you will be hurt by her client’s flawed concept of the child support arrangement. She lacks the ability to improvise, adjust and improve on your case, when her client’s idea is that $3000 will cover the claim, but in fact, it is out of ignorance that you asked for $3000. You needed $30,000.00 and even though she might know you need $30,000.00, she has this ethos that will only let her argue for $3000. (This was a painful lesson to learn.) If Denine were to combine her gifts with empathy, I think she could be a very good attorney in family court. She might even make champion status. What is that? A lawyer who is a champion, is a lawyer who believes an attorney not only argues a case, but leaves their client in a better state than even the client expects. Addendum: Understand the economics of your case before you judge your lawyer too harshly. If your lawyer sees that the best outcome would cost $20k of their billable time, and you only have $10k. Make sure they at least advise you of what you get for what you pay. Lawyers don’t trust that clients will write them a check if they tell them the truth. Denine is a rare gem in this regard. She answers your questions, delivers the goods, and is patient with your learning curve. She is incapable of deception. So do your homework and set your expectations high. She will rise to the occasion or tell you that you need more money.

Denine is a smart energetic lawyer with a broad talent and skill set to bring to any case. When she argues, she truly does have your best interest at heart. She can easily visualize your case. She puts together the pieces well. She readily anticipates what the opposition is going to do next. When she says she's going to deliver something, she does. Denine has a very pleasant court-room demeanor and that demeanor plays well with Judges who like agreeing with her. She is keen on finer logic paths within the law. You will see her paint a very clear: if this is true, this is true and this is true, then you must know that this is true – like a good lawyer should. What Denine lacks is the ability to argue past the law and into leverage. This is her fatal flaw. Allow me to explain. If you have a straight forward case where the path to victory rests in the strict application of the law, she’s your lawyer. However she is blind to what is in your ultimate best interest. Some lawyers are good at seeing the strategic nature of a case and helping their client’s put together the facts and push for your present position and future desired state. If you tell Denine, “I want a divorce.” She will give you one. If you tell her, I want to pay $3000 to settle, she will get you there. But what she lacks is the ability to see how you will be hurt by her client’s flawed concept of the child support arrangement. She lacks the ability to improvise, adjust and improve on your case, when her client’s idea is that $3000 will cover the claim, but in fact, it is out of ignorance that you asked for $3000. You needed $30,000.00 and even though she might know you need $30,000.00, she has this ethos that will only let her argue for $3000. (This was a painful lesson to learn.) If Denine were to combine her gifts with empathy, I think she could be a very good attorney in family court. She might even make champion status. What is that? A lawyer who is a champion, is a lawyer who believes an attorney not only argues a case, but leaves their client in a better state than even the client expects. Addendum: Understand the economics of your case before you judge your lawyer too harshly. If your lawyer sees that the best outcome would cost $20k of their billable time, and you only have $10k. Make sure they at least advise you of what you get for what you pay. Lawyers don’t trust that clients will write them a check if they tell them the truth. Denine is a rare gem in this regard. She answers your questions, delivers the goods, and is patient with your learning curve. She is incapable of deception. So do your homework and set your expectations high. She will rise to the occasion or tell you that you need more money.