The legal services to be provided by Attorney to Client are as follows: REPRESENT CLIENT IN ONE ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING. This retainer does not include representation in any further hearing or appearance and does not include an appearance in any trial. Should any further bearing become necessary, a subsequent retainer shall be completed. Additionally, this retainer does not cover any appeals or preparation of enforcement documents, such as Qualified Domestic Relations Orders.
The client acknowledges that the attorney has explained to satisfaction that this fee is non-refundable. Additionally, this fee is being paid for the purpose of assuring the availability of the firm in this matter and to ensure that the firm does not represent the other party in this matter.While the last line indicates the availability of the attorney, which on its own would constitute a true retainer, my confusion comes from the fact that under "Legal Services to be Rendered," the agreement is that the attorney will "Represent [Me] in One Order to Show Cause Hearing." The wording here sounds to me like this is a security retainer for the attorney to represent me in an show cause hearing, nullifying that this is, indeed, a true retainer since a true retainer is SOLELY for the lawyer's availability, not for a specific service. Hope this makes sense! About the agreement being non-refundable: In CA, only true retainers are non-refundable, even if the agreement says it’s non-refundable, it is unless it is a true retainer. Oftentimes, attorneys will write up a security retainer or advance payment retainer and include that these are non-refundable. But, according to state law they are. The law>agreement. That's why I want to be absolutely 100% sure this is, indeed, a true retainer.