I was not all that pleased with her communication skills. Would send an email and it would be some time before she got back to me, sometimes more than 24 hours. I'd batch multiple questions in one email to cut down on the back and forth and resulting charges. She'd respond but would routinely neglect... to answer all my questions. It was like she was too lazy to read my whole email. I thought maybe all attorneys were like this but shortly thereafter I sold my house and was amazed at my attorney's responsiveness to my questions. In fact, I didn't have to ask too many questions because she was proactive and would inform me of any bumps in the road or potential issues. Night and day compared to Allison. Thought to myself, "wish i would have hire her for my divorce"..LOL. I also thought she was a little too cozy with the opposing attorney (not that I expect them to be at each other like cats and dogs -- I don't). Also didn't think much of her assistant. Hey, I get it, attorneys are sometimes busy and/or stuck in court all day. That's why I copy her assistant in hopes she can answer my questions or at least some subset of the same. Never once did that occur. So in summary my main issue with Allison is poor communications and failure expeditiously answer my email queries if they got answered at all.

A lawyer should fully understand, clarify and defend all the points of a client's concerns and arguments precisely/correctly in proposed provisions of an agreement I found one minor ignorance of ambiguity could cause a time and money-consuming/additional legal process/debate with the plaintiff. I c...learly made a statement initially that "I would only pay up to $1000 per month for extracurricular activities except for summer" and the provision that the adversary suggested and we mistakenly agreed on was "the total amount of the HUSBAND's contribution to the children's extracurricular activities shall not exceed $1000 in any month, with the exception of any month in which the HUSBAND contributes to the cost of summer camp or summer activities for a child, and educational expenses outside of the classroom, which such activity and/or expense shall not be subject to a limitation on contribution by the parties". Before this is arguable, it should have been pointed out by the experienced lawyer. Now our interpretation of the educational expenses outside of the classroom is only limited to summer vacation but the adversary insists they should be the cases during school days as well. This ambiguity should have been clarified at the time by her from my point of view. Besides, the final court date was re-scheduled due to her overlapped court schedule and the cost was all on me. The time is money on the lawyer's society but not laymen's? Overall she did fair or average job but I wish she should take good care of this kind of ambiguous provisions based on her clients' points more precisely going forward. Thanks, CK