Written by: Kimberly Brandt
Researched by: Steve Glista
Edited by: Amy E. Seely, Jeff W. Richards

It’s the dream of many a young attorney (at least those paying off law school debt) to one day rub elbows with Tinseltown’s rich and famous, or, alternatively, drunk and disorderly. Luckily, this means that even the most difficult clients will never lack for representation. Despite what popular opinion may say about the members of the world’s second-oldest profession, even lawyers have their limits. A prime example is the ongoing custody battle between fallen pop princess Britney Spears and her ex-husband, Kevin Federline. Whether you’re on Team Britney, Team K-Fed, or just an innocent bystander, there’s no denying that Britney’s behavior these past few years—driving with her child on her lap, hair shaving, involuntary commitment, et cetera—is enough to make even the most patient lawyer a bit, well, crazy.

Ms. Spears (hereafter “Britney” by her own request), like many celebrities, has found herself at the center of legal controversy more than once. In her divorce and custody battles alone, she’s on her third—that’s right, third—legal team. First, Laura Wasser jumped ship not long after Britney’s divorce was finalized in 2007. Rumor has it that when it came to retaining custody of her children, the celebrity singer wouldn’t follow her lawyer’s advice. Next up was Melvin Goldsman and Marci Levine of the firm Freid & Goldsman, but a few days later Britney fired them. Round three brings us to Britney’s current legal team, members of the firm Trope and Trope, headed by Sorrell Trope. Third time’s a charm, right?

Wrong. It looks as though Trope and team are following in Wasser’s footsteps…right out the door. On January 2, 2008, Trope filed a request with the Superior Court of Los Angeles to withdraw from representing Britney in her custody case (note: Trope and Trope only represents Britney in her custody battle, not for any other matters). Why did the lawyers want out? Evidently the pop star hadn’t learned from Wasser’s departure: Trope and Trope cited a “breakdown in communications” between the firm and Britney that made “further respresentation [sic] of her interests impossible.” However, a few weeks later Trope and Trope withdrew the request, supposedly because their client seemed more cooperative.

But before you could say, “Baby One More Time,” Trope and Trope was asking the court to let them off Team Britney once more. Evidently they can’t get away fast enough, either: instead of waiting until the scheduled hearing on March 10th to find out if they can withdraw as counsel, Trope and team filed an ex parte motion that will allow them to ask the Commissioner on February 13th. Whether it was Britney’s eyebrow-raising antics, rumors that the Spears family wants Wasser back, her hospital admission, or the appointment of a court-ordered conservatorship that drove them to file again, the legal minds of Trope and Trope seemed to be saying “enough is enough.”

Rules for California Lawyers

So why can’t Britney’s legal team change as fast as her accent? The truth is that even lawyers have rules they must follow. In California, all lawyers are bound by the state’s Code of Civil Procedure (”CCP”). Section 285.1 of the CCP states:

An attorney of record for any party in any civil action or proceeding for dissolution of marriage, legal separation, or for a declaration of void or voidable marriage, or for the support, maintenance or custody of minor children [which means Britney’s attorneys for her divorce and custody battles] may withdraw at any time subsequent to the time when any judgment in such action or proceeding, other than an interlocutory judgment, becomes final, [can leave before it’s all over] and prior to service upon him of pleadings or motion papers in any proceeding then pending in said cause, by filing a notice of withdrawal [if they file the right papers]. Such notice shall state (a) date of entry of final decree or judgment, (b) the last known address of such party, (c) that such attorney withdraws as attorney for such party. A copy of such notice shall be mailed to such party at his last known address and shall be served upon the adverse party [and tell Ms. Spears and Mr. Federline in the proper way].

Rule 3.1362 of the California Rules of Court describes what paperwork is required to, in effect, “fire” a client. If her lawyers are trying to quit without Britney’s consent (under CCP section 284(2)), they have to send an official notice to her (for an example, see pages three and four of the documents Trope and Trope filed on January 2nd). They also have to file what’s called a Declaration in Support of Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil with the court (see pages one and two). The Declaration tells the court why the lawyer(s) want to be excused, but only in the vaguest of terms (that’s right, attorney-client privilege will still be in effect, so no juicy details can be found in these papers).

Once counsel has sent the official notice and filed the Declaration, they need to make sure the papers make their way to Britney (see pages five and six of the Declaration); no texting “I quit” for Trope. Finally, the lawyers have to fill out an Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil and send that to both the court and their client. Among other things, this document lists all the hearing dates that are scheduled to happen (because we definitely don’t want Britney to miss another court date after her prior lapses).

Can We Go Now?

That’s it, right? Not quite. Sorrell Trope and team also have to follow the California Rules of Professional Conduct. According to section 3-700(C) of these rules, Britney’s lawyers can’t quit unless her behavior meets specific criteria. In this case, it’s probable (judging from the first Declaration) that Trope and team will try to cite Britney’s behavior (like not showing up to court) as making things “unreasonably difficult” for them to effectively represent her (see section 3-700(C)(1)(d)).

Normally, assuming everything was in on time and neither Mr. Federline’s lawyers nor Ms. Spears herself objected, the attorneys would find out at a scheduled hearing whether or not their freedom would be granted. However, now that Trope and Trope’s ex parte motion has been granted, the decision will be made on February 13th rather than March 10th. Sooner rather than later, internet sites will be rife with speculation over the fate of the paparazzi’s favorite pop star’s latest legal team.

What Does Ms. Spears’s Future Hold?

For those of you worried that Britney will be left lawyerless when it comes to her custody battle, fear not: chances are the singer will have another legal team lined up faster than you can say “media circus.” Perhaps with her conservators taking charge and cleaning house, the now overprotected star will be able to turn her life around. However, unless Britney gets her act together and starts listening to her lawyers’ advice, the world could see the patience of yet another lawyer snap, leaving us saying “Oops!…She did it again.”

*Update 2/13/08*
It looks like Trope and Trope isn’t free of Britney yet. The lawyers met with Commissioner Scott Gordon this morning, but reports say that until there’s a new legal team for Britney, Trope and team will remain on the case. On February 19th, Trope and Trope will meet with the Commissioner once more to (hopefully) pass the custody battle torch to another firm.

*Update 2/19/08*
It’s official, ladies and gentlemen: Trope and Trope no longer represents Britney Spears. Stacy Phillips is the pop star’s newest lawyer. Ms. Phillips’s former clients include Bobby Brown and Tori Spelling’s ex-husband, Charlie Shahnaian.