How Does the Lawyer Reply Meaningfully Differ From a Client’s Answer?

What is the lawyer reply meaning when one calls up a lawyer for help in a personal or family matter? There are many questions that are raised when the client calls up a lawyer to discuss a case. This is not so different from calling up an attorney or a medical doctor for help. The question is: “Will the doctor take care of my problem, or will you prescribe medicine?” The same principle applies in Personal Injury cases. When a person calls up a lawyer to discuss a Personal Injury case, they expect that the lawyer will explain what the problem is, why it occurred, how it should be dealt with, and who should be held responsible if anything undesirable happens.

Why would anyone want to confuse the meaning of the word “lawyer” in relation to Personal Injury? Is there anyone who is confused by this term? No! Everyone is perfectly aware that a lawyer is a lawyer, that he is trained and skilled in the law, and that he knows the difference between right and wrong. That’s why he has the ability to dispense justice and fair play.

Now, you might want to ask: “What is the lawyer reply meaning in a personal injury case where one person suffers from an attack due to another person’s negligence?” Again, there is nothing confusing about the concept of lawyer reply meaning. Everyone involved in the case knows that a lawyer is involved in the case and is there to provide justice, to offer guidance, and to provide information on the matter at hand. There is nothing confusing in this situation. This is simply how lawyers do their jobs.

As soon as a person asks this question, the other person cannot avoid the reality that a lawyer is involved in the case and will have to give an explanation of the case. This explanation will inevitably be in legal terms. The question the latter is asking himself, is why the question is being asked.

Now, the lawyer’s response to the question can mean two things: either he agrees with the question, or he does not. The second answer is more common. When a question is put to a lawyer, he should offer an explanation. He cannot avoid answering the question if it is put to him, as it clearly tells him that he is involved in the case and that he will have to give an answer.

However, when a lawyer avoids answering the question, he invites being quizzed on what exactly is the case. It becomes clear that the lawyer is not really interested in the case but only in gaining entry into the case, thus, he answers the question in a way that puts everyone on the spot: what does he think? Does he agree with the answer or not? And if he does not, the questioner should state that it is pertinent that he is informed of the lawyer’s position.

In other words, a lawyer’s decision to give an answer does not necessarily mean that he agrees with the question. Instead, it may mean that he is not well-versed enough in the matter to offer an opinion that will help the case. This may be because he is busy with other matters and has not been able to devote enough time studying the case to offer an adequate answer.

What does this all mean? In a legal sense, answering questions with regard to how a lawyer replies suggests that the lawyer himself is not very knowledgeable about the case. In some ways, this could mean that the lawyer is unsuitable for the case, though this is not considered to be grounds to remove him from the case.

About the Author

You may also like these