I help Californians handle their own civil case, with a real attorney on call for the parts that matter.

Limited-scope is the modern alternative to a $10,000 retainer.

A traditional retainer locks you into paying for every email, every call, every review, every motion, every appearance. For people with organized matters and a budget that does not stretch to a full retainer, that model does not work.

California recognized this with Rules of Court 3.35 through 3.37. You can hire me for a specific task or a defined event, not the whole case. Examples I have done recently:

• Review and refine a complaint drafted by the client before filing.
• Coach a self-represented plaintiff through a small-claims appeal.
• Draft an attorney-letterhead demand letter that the client sends and follows up on themselves.
• Prepare a CCP §1005(b) motion opposition with the client appearing pro se at the hearing.
• Evaluate a settlement offer and prepare a counter, leaving the negotiation to the client.

You stay in control of the case. I stay in my lane. The scope is written down before any work starts.

Anything in the right column can be added by mutual written agreement and an updated scope. I will not surprise you with a bill for work outside scope.

Your job, my job, and where the line is.

For limited-scope to work, the scope has to be tight. Every engagement I take is documented in a written scope agreement that says:

• What I do. The exact deliverable. "Draft complaint with up to 4 causes of action, one revision round." Or "Two-hour strategy call with a written memo summarizing decisions." Or "Three demand letters to specified counterparties on a 14-day response window."
• What you do. The facts you gather, the documents you collect, the filings you make, the hearings you attend, the negotiations you handle.
• Out-of-scope. What is explicitly NOT my responsibility. Trial. Discovery. Appeal. Calls with opposing counsel. Filing the document I drafted. Calendaring deadlines for you.
• The fee. Hourly at $240, or a fixed fee for a defined deliverable. Either way, the cap is visible before you commit.
• How we stop. When the scope ends, we both confirm in writing. If you need more work, we sign a new scope. No surprise rolling engagement.

California Rule of Professional Conduct 1.2(b) explicitly allows this kind of scoping. The CA Bar has approved limited-scope as a legitimate practice model. The keys are written scope, informed client consent, and competent work within the scope.

Good fit indicators

• You have organized facts: a timeline, documents, dates, dollar amounts.
• The matter is in California or has a California nexus (defendant here, contract performed here, court here).
• You want to handle most of the case yourself but want a CA attorney to verify the legal theory, draft the pleading, or coach the strategy.
• The dispute is contained: one or two causes of action, identifiable parties, a clear factual narrative.
• You can read and edit a draft, sign documents, and follow procedural instructions.
• The dollar amount in dispute is large enough to justify the fee but not so large that you should hire a full litigation team.

Poor fit indicators (I will tell you)

• You want me to handle everything and just need to find the cheapest way to do it. Limited-scope is not a discount retainer; it is a different model.
• The matter involves emergency injunctive relief, ex parte applications, or temporary restraining orders that need same-day filing.
• You face a complex multi-party case with parallel arbitrations, mass-tort posture, or class-action exposure.
• You are facing criminal liability or family-law issues. I do not handle those.
• The other side has already filed against you and an answer is due within seven days. There is rarely time to scope properly under that pressure.
• You want me to be visible to opposing counsel and have my name on every paper. That changes the engagement to full representation.

The California framework I work under.

CRC 3.35 is the general authorization for limited-scope representation in civil cases in California superior court. It permits an attorney and client to agree in writing that the attorney's representation will be limited to specified tasks or events.

CRC 3.36 sets up the optional notice-of-limited-scope-appearance procedure. If we agree I will appear at a specific hearing (and only that hearing), I file the appropriate notice with the court, attend that hearing, and then the limited-scope obligation ends.

CRC 3.37 governs nondisclosure of attorney drafting assistance where the attorney does not appear in the case. The streamlined procedure for being relieved after a limited-scope appearance is part of CRC 3.36, not 3.37.

Rule 1.2(b) of the CA Rules of Professional Conduct says a lawyer may limit the scope of representation if the limitation is reasonable under the circumstances and the client gives informed consent. Every scope I take satisfies both prongs.

What this means for you: the framework is well-developed, the rules are clear, and there is no risk of inadvertently dragging me into the whole case. You hire me for what is written down.