Folinskyinla

Hi:

I'm sorry about being "ambiguous." Your question is a reasonable one.

Its just that there are things I can talk about when "attorney-client privilege" applies but really, really hesitate to talk about in public forum regarding a specific person [you]. To be honest, these are "ethics" rules that apply to me as an attorney. And even a non-attorney could get in trouble talking about these issues publicly.

You have to chose your options carefully. BTW, if you intend to do the forms yourself, it would be nice if you offer to pay a consultation fee. Many of us do free consultation in the expectation that we might get hired.

Good luck. I just do not want you to get in trouble.

Fry24

Thank you, that makes it a little clearer, yet still not at all clear. But I now understand why that must be the case. As others have suggested, I'm sure all of this will seem far more understandable once I've had a consultation, which I absolutely would pay for if I decided to fill out my own paper work.

Again, many thanks for your time and concern.

Fry24

I'm just putting this out there thanks to the advice of a kind stranger - I am going back to England's green and pleasant land at the beginning of next week. Not sure if this changes anything.

ian-mstm

Quite simply, if he gives you specific information it could be construed that he is acting as your de facto attorney. So, to protect himself, he'll suggest only a general course of action.

Ian

ian-mstm

Quite simply, the laws dealing with conspiracy would make bamboo shoots forced under your fingernails seem like a pleasant manicure!

Ian

Noorah101

I highly suggesting having that consultation with an immigration attorney in person with you significant other, before you leave the USA.

Rene

Fry24

Well - bloody hell.

Just called an attorney. I feel like a prize prat. And am monumentally pissed off with myself. So I'm guessing the elephant in this forum, the thing that people were hinting at but could not say and possibly even the thing we couldn't/can't discuss is that -

I could have filed out here - and stayed out here - and been given a temporary work permit within 2-3 months.

If I want to do this now, I would have to refile.

Errrrrrrr. . .don't really know what else to say!

Ray

Your conversation shall remain private

Fry24

Ok - got it

Fry24

I'm going tomorrow.

ian-mstm

I suggest that at this point, you make no changes and continue with your present course of action. The fees have been submitted... the tickets have been paid for... and for the one or two extra months this might save it'll easily cost you an additional $1.5K.

You are already on the fast track.

Edit: I should mention that sometimes things go wrong. If you refile as you're suggesting, and things go wrong, they will go *horrendously* wrong... with no fix available.

Ian

Matthew Udall

My guess is that if an attorney is familiar with what goes on in news groups, and if a consultation client came to the attorney and said he or she is going to archive on the net everything the attorney says (basically broadcast the consultation) I think this might influence how the attorney advises the consultation client in that private office setting (which the attorney now knows is not private at all).

While I don't listen to attorneys who do radio talk shows, my guess is that the public nature of the "back and forth" between the attorney and the caller has a similar effect on what the attorney feels comfortable saying in that public setting.

As for the “an attorney just fills out forms and collects things you send to him” argument, a couple of hypothetical examples come to mind. How about a client who supplies (to his attorney) his State Marriage certificate for submission in an AOS case. The attorney looks at it, listens to the alarm bells that are now ringing and does a quick check. After the quick check the attorney tells him to go ahead and now order the actual state version of the marriage certificate. Actually that one is pretty common (just like divorces not being final is also common) but every case is different and very small details might cause problems.

As an alternative example, lets say one is getting ready for a K-1 interview at a difficult Consulate (one known for sending suspicious cases back to a Service Center for reconsideration or revocation). I would hate for something like a tiny notation on a pay stub make a Consul wonder if the petitioner is still married to his prior spouse, or alternatively, worry that he’s actually married to the I-129f beneficiary. In such a situation, things can be done to help reduce the odds of this potential problem turning into an actual problem and a good attorney will advise accordingly. And providing that type of legal advice has absolutely nothing to do with the initial step in typing information on forms or a client sending evidence to the attorney to examine (or sending it to the Service Center for a do-it-yourselfer). Again, there is much more to it than typing forms and making copies of evidence provided.

Another fun situation is when I read e-mail sent between a petitioner and beneficiary in a K-1 case, where they lovingly refer to each other as husband or wife. It’s cute; its understandable, but it is also dangerous when submitted with a case.