Legal Marketing
Law Firm Touts ‘60 Minute Divorce’ (Poll)
Posted Feb 11, 2009 9:05 AM CST
By Debra Cassens Weiss
Screen shot of "60 Minute Divorce" ad.
A New York City law firm is touting a “60 Minute Divorce” for couples with uncontested issues, no kids and no property to divide.
The Brodsky Law Firm is offering to prepare divorce papers and file the case while divorcing couples dine at a nearby McDonald’s or Starbucks with a $10 gift card provided by the firm. “Walk in married. Walk out divorced (almost). And get a free lunch,” says a press release issued by the firm.
“After that, it's just a matter of waiting for the court to issue the divorce, usually just a few weeks,” the press release says. “There are no further office visits required, and no additional paperwork to sign.”
The cost of the uncontested divorce is $299 plus court, filing, process and messenger fees—which comes to a total of $699, according to the law firm’s website. Have property to divide? Add $99. Kids? Add another $99. Need spousal support provisions? That’s $99 also.
Name partner Steve Brodsky says the cost of his firm’s 60 Minute Divorce is less than that charged by do-it-yourself document preparation services.
- How B of A’s GC Got Fired: Leave Now, and Leave Your BlackBerry Behind
- Schools Ranked by 'Super Lawyers' Produced
- Law Firm Price Wars Break Out as Some Try ‘Loss Leader’ Bids for Work
- Five Questions for Law Firms Abandoning Lockstep Compensation
- Judge Jails 2 Attorneys for Contempt in 4 Days
- Reed Smith Will Ask Nonequity Partners to Pony Up Possibly 15% of Pay
- Court Deputy Ordered to Apologize or Face Jail After Taking Lawyer's Paperwork
- Skadden Jumps on the Bonus Bandwagon
- ABA Executive Director Resigns
- Nasty Attitude to Co-Worker, Naughty Word in E-Mail Cost 2 Their Jobs
Should Supreme Court Justices Be Able to Review News Accounts Before Publication?
Comments
sue
Feb 11, 2009 9:39 AM CST
simply disgusting and a disgrace to the legal world
Flag this comment
J.D.
Feb 11, 2009 11:11 AM CST
No legal issues, no kids, and no property to divide? Why would you even need a lawyer?
If only bar exam questions were this easy.
Flag this comment
Michael
Feb 11, 2009 11:42 AM CST
This is worse than going pro-se because the clients are likely relying on the lawyer to review their case files, not just prepare paperwork. Even if a lawyer explains they’re not going to do that it seems like inadequate representation to not at least try to dig into the basic facts of a case. Wonder what will happen when clients wonder a year or two later why their lawyer didn’t fully inform they of their right to property or spousal support that they waived over a burger.
Flag this comment
dumbfounded
Feb 11, 2009 11:46 AM CST
no kids, no property..why would you even need a divorce?
Flag this comment
jose
Feb 11, 2009 2:26 PM CST
the mistress gets in the way
Flag this comment
JBR
Feb 11, 2009 2:33 PM CST
Eh, bar exam questions are easier than a mishandled divorce. Heck, law school is probably cheaper too. It was for me anyway. But hey, I found out I’m good at something I had never even considered before and thoroughly enjoy it.
No legal issues, no, kids, no property, etc., why would you even need a document prep service? The basic fill in the blank forms are available at most court houses and many courts even have theirs available via the web these days.
Even though they are advertising a “60 minute divorce” this type of scenario brings to mind sayings such as; “If you’re not part of the solution there’s money to be made prolonging the problem.”
There is so much potential for some big messes down the road.
Flag this comment
Johnson
Feb 11, 2009 3:47 PM CST
Yes, Sue, what a disgrace making the legal system affordable and easy for clients.
Flag this comment
B. McLeod
Feb 11, 2009 6:33 PM CST
Wow. Do they represent the couple as a single, collective “client”? You would think the conflict counseling, waivers, consents and disclosures alone would take more than an hour.
Flag this comment
Jennifer
Feb 12, 2009 2:06 PM CST
I agree. I don’t think you can competently represent both of them and get the divorce done in under an hour.
It’s a sleazy promotion. I wouldnt want to work for them.
Flag this comment
Charles
Feb 13, 2009 5:21 AM CST
If everything is done correctly I do not see the harm in providing the service. I really just hope it is all above board and not just a come on to first get a client in the door and then start adding a lot of ala carte charges. It gives people who have what appears to be a simple matter the chance to use an attorney to confirm it is really just a simple matter and then pay a reasonable fee. As long as the one size fits all approach is really the truth based upon all the facts this appears to be reasonable.
Flag this comment
Philip
Feb 13, 2009 5:47 AM CST
I guess next is the 60 minute bar complaint. Having both parties come in together is a bad start. I think the idea of making the process more accessible is a good one, however.
Flag this comment
Shakara Smithers
Feb 13, 2009 8:04 AM CST
At #7 (Johnson),
While I think that there is some merit to your intimation that having “affordable” and “easy” services for clients is important, don’t harp on #1 (Sue) for her views either- views which likely run a lot deeper than the affordability/ease of access to legal representation.
When Sue says that what this site is doing is disgusting, she’s probably speaking on moral/religious/ethical grounds. And, if she is, I whole-heartedly agree with her.
I do not think it wise that couples having a mere spat can make a rash, uniformed decision by initiating a divorce in the same time that it takes to get eyeglasses made at Lenscrafters. If a divorce is truly what is wanted, why not hire real lawyers that will represent each client’s interests thoroughly and get the same stuff done in a few weeks time?
Marriage is supposed to be important and it is supposed to be sacred. I know that those are not ideals that many folks still hold in this country, but I do. And I can’t imagine what kind of lawyers and what kind of clients would want an arrangement where it is ended so quickly, so unconsequently. At least in a more involved divorce, the parties often have the time to reflect on what they did wrong or are often confronted with relational issues/faults which may help them to grow and be more successful in their next relationship! In an arrangement like this, no personal growth is likely to occur. It’s in an out and then on to the next person (and the next future sixty-minute divorce).
$99 more to get divorced if the couple has children! This is the breakdown of the American family at its ugliest.
Flag this comment
JME
Feb 13, 2009 9:45 AM CST
When the couple are in agreement, and there are no children or property, there is no advice needed, no conflict in doing the paperwork. When I was an independent paralegal (in the state I was in, that was legal, so don’t growl about UPL), I did these divorces for $200. The client piled the paperwork themselves, paid their own filing fee, but the paperwork was complete and notarized when I was finished. Filing and waiting 30 days did the rest.
Flag this comment
JME
Feb 13, 2009 9:48 AM CST
additional comment: The couple probably doesn’t care about counseling to save the marriage at this point, they just want to separate and move on. Why not do it the easy, no-conflict way?
Flag this comment
NBD
Feb 13, 2009 10:09 AM CST
I don’t handle family law or divorce, but as I recall from 1000 years ago, the parties, if they wanted to go the no-issues route, had to have a separation agreement in place for at least 1 year before commencing divorce proceedings in New York. Has that changed? That would seem to me to entirely negate the 60-minute deal.
For me, the jury is still out on whether this is just sleazy promotion or marketing brilliance in making the legal system more available and affordable to the public.
Flag this comment
JME
Feb 13, 2009 10:32 AM CST
the 60 minutes is the document prep time while the couple are kicked back over a coffee nearby. It took me two hours to prepare a full uncontested divorce with no children. that included the interview, notarizations and printing of the final papers.
Flag this comment
R. Gould-Saltman FamilyLawGuy.blogspot.com
Feb 13, 2009 11:36 AM CST
Anyone ever consider why we have no problem making it even easier than this for folks to get married, but some seem to want to throw artificial obstacles in the way of dissolving the relationship?
I’ve been practicing family law for 30 years, and it seems that the best way to reduce the divorce rate would be to make people spend a little more time thinking before they get married.
R Gould-Saltman
Flag this comment
James E. Barlow
Feb 13, 2009 12:27 PM CST
Do you get a discount if you don’t like hamburgers.?
Flag this comment
Tom
Feb 13, 2009 1:15 PM CST
The attorney of record would have to be very sure the setlement is equitable, or they are opening thmeselves up for a malpractice claim from the disadvantaged client. Our rule is only represent one spouse.
Flag this comment
James Pollock
Feb 13, 2009 1:43 PM CST
Re #12:
What is the state’s interest in artificially preserving a marriage? As opposed to the church’s, I mean? If people want to get together and act like they are married, even without the state’s sanction, they will. And if people who are married want to act like they are not, even without the state’s sanction, they’ll do that, too. Fast, no-fault divorce just reflects that truth. In a case with no property (and no debt) to divide, and no children to provide for, it really shouldn’t take that long.
Flag this comment
Christine Tharp
Feb 13, 2009 3:34 PM CST
No matter how you look at it, the work is legal representation, and it is an inherent conflict to represent both spouses. Most folks dont even know that retirement benefits are property or that they can extend the other spouses health insurance coverage through COBRA. What about the abused spouse being brought in by the abuser ? Its ok that the abused is further abused by the system? How about the disabled spouse, who determines if and how much spousal support should be? $99.00 more for kids? All kids are being treated the same? What about disabled children? Do they even inquire? Probably not for $99.00. One size never fits all. All of these issues apply to every socio-economic level family. As explained this five and dime divorce mill doesnt pass the smell test
Flag this comment
sally d
Feb 13, 2009 3:37 PM CST
As a family mediator, I can’t comment on the reasonable cost if it’s an uncontested divorce, but I will comment on the “add-ons” and the ambiguity of the advertisement. Any dissolution of a partnership is emotional and when it includes property and/or children it requires thoughtful and informed decision-making. I think this ad is misleading and may attract couples who are less informed about the multitude of decisions that need to be made, as well as the long term ramifications (when children are involved). This smacks of “rope ‘em in” then charge for the real work.
Flag this comment
Andy the Lawyer
Feb 13, 2009 3:53 PM CST
In a sane world, separate legal counsel and contracting would be required for marriage, too. It might put some Nevada chapels with a spontaneous clientele out of business, but if getting married was as difficult as getting a divorce there’d be fewer divorces.
Next stop = separate counsel and contracting for people seeking government licenses to breed.
Flag this comment
gea
Feb 15, 2009 5:53 PM CST
I really don’t understand #12. Why is 99 dollars a worse attorey than paying 3999 dollars. Is it the money or the service. If the attorney does a good job for whatever price, he will get people who will recommend her/him. Whether she/he provides the service probono, for 99 and a sandwich or 3,999 dollars. The couple could go to a conflict resolution service, draw up a document containing what is important to them, then have an attorney draw up a dissolution agreement based on their agreement. If after 5000 divorces, an attorney can’t do it in 2 hours or less, then she/he is not focusing. Go Walmart!
Flag this comment
Michael
Feb 16, 2009 7:39 PM CST
China’s latest marriage law (2003) allows one to go to the local government office, fill out the proper forms and get a no-kids/no-property divorce in 5 minutes. They used to have to get permission from a town council. Capitalism and concubinage has busted up a lot of families.
Flag this comment
Kalifornia Arnold
Feb 17, 2009 12:42 AM CST
At this firm, you go in married and come out disillusioned (after all, marriage is an institution and we all know what people enter an institution)
Flag this comment
Kali
Feb 17, 2009 10:26 AM CST
For legal professionals: Not Good!
For consumers in today’s economy: GREAT!
About time someone had the idea to lower the cost of divorce. Now how about lowering, or obliterating the ‘choking’ fees?
Attorney charges and fees are the very reason most lawyers and law firms don’t get enough clients and end up being laid-off.
Flag this comment
JAV
Feb 22, 2009 6:30 PM CST
Beats going pro se. Of course divorce lawyers provide better quality services, but many working stiffs cannot afford lawyer’s fees. No everyone understands how to fill out the court forms. This is an imperfect solution for a large unmet need. Stop complaining and offer some constructive solutions to make legal services more affordable to everyone.
Flag this comment
Add a Comment
We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.
Commenting has expired on this post.