All my complaints are very nitpicky, but by the end of the book I was spending as much time focusing on the things I didn't like as I was enjoying the story itself. As is often the case, I have so much more to say about an imperfect book than one I loved.
Like a lot of contemporary romances, especially those billed as romcoms and/or having a cartoon-y cover, the hero was kind of a big old cinnamon roll. In general, as in this story, he's a blandly perfect object against which the (frustratingly) spazzy heroine can bounce against. But in this story, where the recurring banter between the lovers is that she thinks he is and continues to call him an asshole, it's just so unearned. I wish books like this had the courage of their convictions; in this case, let the guy be a bit of an asshole? Like, have him make a full-throated case for being a divorce attorney, rather than a gentle nonprofit lawyer who got waylaid by big law accidentally, or whatever the premise is here. We see him being such a nice guy (his long-term relationship with his old law professor/mentor, for instance, or helping the heroine make a crucial career-expanding networking opportunity). Don't get me wrong, who doesn't like a nice guy, but it's never clear why this actually nice guy would fall for a woman who continually calls him an asshole and accuses him of all kinds of nefarious activity when as far as I can tell he's fairly representing his client in a divorce case (which he ethically is compelled to do). I actually liked the hero more than the heroine, but the plot would have worked better, and dear god the action and banter would have been so much more fun, if he were a bit more of a prick. I long for the days of romance novels where both the hero and the heroine have a character arc.
About that spazzy heroine: I don't know how much of this is a problem in how the character was conceived versus how she was written. For instance, I guess we're to take the idea that she's really damaged by her mother's many divorces and that's why she's so anti-divorce lawyer? But at the same time, she never took any of those relationships very seriously (i.e., it's not like she lost important father figures); her "damage" such as she has any is from having a flaky mother rather than the divorces per se, I'd say. I don't mind the idea of a hot-tempered heroine, but most of the time she just seems immature and a bit of a jerk? It's never really clear to me why the hero would stand to be called asshole (undeservedly, from what I can tell) and put up with this nonsense.
My other major nitpick: Like so many contemporary romances, the third act conflict is rushed and unearned. And there's like two or three of them in a row (1) he's her friend's opposing counsel in her divorce and she needs to tell her friend! 2) she can't tell him about his client's addiction and 3) he arrives at his client's house, where she's been enforcing his new sobriety by blocking the doorway, and assumes, after they've just spent an incredible sexytime weekend together, that she's already cheating on him. I *hated* this last one. It's unearned (he knows she's ex-friends with his client, why we he assume their relationship is sexual? Why would someone who is otherwise so level-headed jump to this conclusion at all, let alone not give her time to explain herself?). But it's also implausible: what lawyer anywhere in the world, let alone in New York City, just drops by their client's home to deliver in person the news that they're breaking off the attorney-client relationship? Good thing this is the one apartment building (in pricey west village no less) that has an exterior lock that never works so anyone can just drop by at any time! This really stuck in my craw.
I guess it's fine to wave a hand and say "for romance reasons" but I really don't think in this day and age we have to work so hard to contrive to have the heroine need to shack up with the hero for one night in order to move their physical relationship forward. First of all, an entire apartment building would not be shut down by order of the city ON A FRIDAY NIGHT, with no notice. As a former NYC resident, that's the kind of thing, if it happened at all, would be communicated for weeks in advance. And whatever level of repairs were necessary to fix a situation that's bad enough that the building was temporarily and immediately foreclosed to all residents...well those would take more than two days over the weekend to fix. Silliness! But also, two single adults who are attracted to each other can just...act on that attraction? I can't tell if this is the takeover by tropes (forced proximity, in this case) of the entire romance industry or if authors simply don't know how to write convincing chat/banter that leads two characters towards the bedroom (I suspect it's a bit of both), but I had to roll my eyes at how hard this plot had to work to get some forced proximity that led way to drinks to lowered inhibitions to sexytime.
I was hoping for more from a BOTM selection, I'm not going to lie. This wasn't appallingly bad or anything, but it was so far from perfect. Maybe this is the kind of book that 20-30 years ago, when there were more editors working in publishing houses, that would have been better. Because this book seriously needed someone to poke at and clean up some of these inconsistencies and plot contrivances. Somewhere in here is a much better book.