You're jumping the gun here. Two prerequisites must be met before you consult a lawyer:
1. You've exhausted all other options; and
2. You decided that what you're fighting for has enough monetary value to justify the time and money you'll spend exploring and pursuing legal remedy.
Of course it's worth knowing your position. If you have no contract it's a mess. If you don't have founder vesting it's a mess. He can walk away with half but then again so can you.
You can take the lack of such formalities as pretext: say to your cofounder you meed some structure. Say you need founder vesting and clear division of responsibilities. Make yourself CEO and then you can decide who designs the website. If necessary you can fire him then (without cause he'll still end up with a piece but that can be better than half).
Or simply talk to him about your grievances and concerns.
Many times it's worth consulting a lawyer earlier rather than later, as such a consultation can do all sorts of things for you - eliminate options you might have otherwise wasted time pursuing, illuminate options you weren't aware of, and also keep you from making any mistakes that could come back to hurt you later.
That last point is most important and most overlooked by non-lawyers, I think. I've learned from friends who have learned the hard way that in disputes like this involving money or business, it's crucial you know the applicable law from the outset and adhere to it, even if you only intend a legal solution as the absolute last resort.
If it does come to that, your case is strongly bolstered in court if you can show that you were aware of the applicable law and diligently followed it from the outset. For example, if your adversary in court broke the law, and then you broke it too to counteract him, the court will look unfavorably on both. Two wrongs do not make a right, especially in the eyes of courts. So it's worth positioning yourself from the beginning of any such dispute as completely in compliance with legal requirements.
If you don't know what those requirements are, an early consultation with a lawyer could be valuable.
PS - it's also less stressful to simply rely on the law to guide your decisions in this uncharted territory, rather than trying to make it up as you go. Don't reinvent the wheel here, instead leverage the hundreds/thousands of years of codified dispute resolution and legal theory.
Not necessarily. His cofounder may simply be oblivious to his level of concern. Until he's sat down and said "I'm not happy with A, B and C and if I can't get satisfactory resolution I'm going to have to stop doing this" (perhaps leave out the ultimatum part at first) then it's premature to either fight or run.
1. You've exhausted all other options; and
2. You decided that what you're fighting for has enough monetary value to justify the time and money you'll spend exploring and pursuing legal remedy.
Of course it's worth knowing your position. If you have no contract it's a mess. If you don't have founder vesting it's a mess. He can walk away with half but then again so can you.
You can take the lack of such formalities as pretext: say to your cofounder you meed some structure. Say you need founder vesting and clear division of responsibilities. Make yourself CEO and then you can decide who designs the website. If necessary you can fire him then (without cause he'll still end up with a piece but that can be better than half).
Or simply talk to him about your grievances and concerns.
If those conversations fail just wAlk away.