Lawyers map
>12.0k
experienced lawyers
Filter by
11 Jul, 2024 by Kristopher lichtanski
I have had an excellent experience with CCL and Ms. Choi in the matter of a complicated easement / title situation. The office staff was super responsive, appointments were scheduled quickly and in collaboration with my schedule/availability, and the meetings I had with Ms. Choi were focused, organized, and super productive. I felt that Ms. Choi was prepared for the meetings, understood what I was dealing with, and discussed with me multiple options and potential outcomes regarding this legal matter, which is going to end up in Court. I could not have asked for a better attorney for my situation (and I have consulted with others prior to CCL) and I very much look forward to my ongoing work with CCL and Ms. Choi. I recommend CCL and Ms. Choi wholeheartedly!
Read more
05 May, 2024 by Ricardo saenz
I arranged a meeting with her to discuss immigration matters and seek professional validation of the process I had completed on my own. Unfortunately, during our reunion, she seemed more focused on protecting herself than genuinely assisting me. However, when I attended my USCIS appointment today, everything was in order, and the concerns she raised did not materialize. It was a stressful experience unnecessarily.
Read more
26 Apr, 2024 by Larry hu
I did not have a good experience with the law firm. My main issues is that Boyoon Choi would repeatedly interrupt me and cut me off before I could finish speaking and there were some mannerisms like scoffing (in a subtle but noticeable way) that came off as pretty condescending and I received a general negative feeling from the tone of voice she used with me. She was also 6 minutes late to our Zoom meeting but cut our 30 minute meeting short nonetheless so we really only had 24 minutes together. I'm sure she would probably bill the time for 30 minutes to my MetLife benefits and not the 24 minutes that I actually got. The way I see it, if a client does not have the correct understanding then inform them in a respectful way. Trying to be subtle with mannerisms like quietly scoffing or responding with a negative tone, one that felt a bit indignant towards me feels less like you're working with someone that's trying to advocate for you and more like you're talking to someone that's trying to take out whatever stress she may be having towards you. It seems that no wonder her staff seems to sound a bit on edge over the phone as I can imagine what it can be like to be subjected to that over time.
She also knew that my home is in Snohomish County but told me that she can't help with the eviction process in that area, but took my money through my MetLife benefit anyway. That's pretty messed up.
Lastly, I also felt it was problematic to be told that she did not know the RCW that covered why a 90 day notice to vacate due to sale is not enforceable unless it is specifically mentioned in the lease agreement. When I requested clarification for her to specify how is this the case, she could only tell me it's part of the general landlord tenant rights that a lease agreement has to specify that an early termination can take place due to sale and that this language would not be specifically mentioned due to it being covered under the general umbrella of tenant rights. However, RCW 59.18.650 clearly states it's permissible for a landlord to end a lease agreement early with cause for the purpose of selling a home.
Boyoon Choi should really be careful with giving advice that she clearly does not know the basis for. It is concerning when you ask for the RCW that she does not know it, and scoffs at you while mentioning it's part of the general rights for a tenant.
Anyways, here is what I was told by another source about the permissibility of ending a lease early to sell the home:
In Washington State, typically, if a landlord provides a 90-day notice to vacate for the purpose of selling the property, this is generally considered lawful. In Washington State, the enforceability of a 90-day notice to vacate due to the sale of a property typically does not require a specific clause in the lease agreement stating that sale of the home entails the tenant moving out. The standard process allows landlords to issue such a notice as part of the rights to dispose of their property, assuming other legal and procedural requirements are met (e.g., proper notice period and service).
Lastly, she was also incorrect about my MetLife legal benefit. She said I don't have benefits for litigation as part of my benefit but in my MetLife portal it clearly states: "This service covers the Participant as a landlord for matters involving leases, security deposits and disputes with a residential tenant. The service includes attorney services for the eviction of a tenant up to and including trial."
Read more
11 Jul, 2024 by Kristopher lichtanski
I have had an excellent experience with CCL and Ms. Choi in the matter of a complicated easement / title situation. The office staff was super responsive, appointments were scheduled quickly and in collaboration with my schedule/availability, and the meetings I had with Ms. Choi were focused, organized, and super productive. I felt that Ms. Choi was prepared for the meetings, understood what I was dealing with, and discussed with me multiple options and potential outcomes regarding this legal matter, which is going to end up in Court. I could not have asked for a better attorney for my situation (and I have consulted with others prior to CCL) and I very much look forward to my ongoing work with CCL and Ms. Choi. I recommend CCL and Ms. Choi wholeheartedly!
Read more
05 May, 2024 by Ricardo saenz
I arranged a meeting with her to discuss immigration matters and seek professional validation of the process I had completed on my own. Unfortunately, during our reunion, she seemed more focused on protecting herself than genuinely assisting me. However, when I attended my USCIS appointment today, everything was in order, and the concerns she raised did not materialize. It was a stressful experience unnecessarily.
Read more
26 Apr, 2024 by Larry hu
I did not have a good experience with the law firm. My main issues is that Boyoon Choi would repeatedly interrupt me and cut me off before I could finish speaking and there were some mannerisms like scoffing (in a subtle but noticeable way) that came off as pretty condescending and I received a general negative feeling from the tone of voice she used with me. She was also 6 minutes late to our Zoom meeting but cut our 30 minute meeting short nonetheless so we really only had 24 minutes together. I'm sure she would probably bill the time for 30 minutes to my MetLife benefits and not the 24 minutes that I actually got. The way I see it, if a client does not have the correct understanding then inform them in a respectful way. Trying to be subtle with mannerisms like quietly scoffing or responding with a negative tone, one that felt a bit indignant towards me feels less like you're working with someone that's trying to advocate for you and more like you're talking to someone that's trying to take out whatever stress she may be having towards you. It seems that no wonder her staff seems to sound a bit on edge over the phone as I can imagine what it can be like to be subjected to that over time.
She also knew that my home is in Snohomish County but told me that she can't help with the eviction process in that area, but took my money through my MetLife benefit anyway. That's pretty messed up.
Lastly, I also felt it was problematic to be told that she did not know the RCW that covered why a 90 day notice to vacate due to sale is not enforceable unless it is specifically mentioned in the lease agreement. When I requested clarification for her to specify how is this the case, she could only tell me it's part of the general landlord tenant rights that a lease agreement has to specify that an early termination can take place due to sale and that this language would not be specifically mentioned due to it being covered under the general umbrella of tenant rights. However, RCW 59.18.650 clearly states it's permissible for a landlord to end a lease agreement early with cause for the purpose of selling a home.
Boyoon Choi should really be careful with giving advice that she clearly does not know the basis for. It is concerning when you ask for the RCW that she does not know it, and scoffs at you while mentioning it's part of the general rights for a tenant.
Anyways, here is what I was told by another source about the permissibility of ending a lease early to sell the home:
In Washington State, typically, if a landlord provides a 90-day notice to vacate for the purpose of selling the property, this is generally considered lawful. In Washington State, the enforceability of a 90-day notice to vacate due to the sale of a property typically does not require a specific clause in the lease agreement stating that sale of the home entails the tenant moving out. The standard process allows landlords to issue such a notice as part of the rights to dispose of their property, assuming other legal and procedural requirements are met (e.g., proper notice period and service).
Lastly, she was also incorrect about my MetLife legal benefit. She said I don't have benefits for litigation as part of my benefit but in my MetLife portal it clearly states: "This service covers the Participant as a landlord for matters involving leases, security deposits and disputes with a residential tenant. The service includes attorney services for the eviction of a tenant up to and including trial."
Read more
11 Jul, 2024 by Kristopher lichtanski
I have had an excellent experience with CCL and Ms. Choi in the matter of a complicated easement / title situation. The office staff was super responsive, appointments were scheduled quickly and in collaboration with my schedule/availability, and the meetings I had with Ms. Choi were focused, organized, and super productive. I felt that Ms. Choi was prepared for the meetings, understood what I was dealing with, and discussed with me multiple options and potential outcomes regarding this legal matter, which is going to end up in Court. I could not have asked for a better attorney for my situation (and I have consulted with others prior to CCL) and I very much look forward to my ongoing work with CCL and Ms. Choi. I recommend CCL and Ms. Choi wholeheartedly!
Read more
05 May, 2024 by Ricardo saenz
I arranged a meeting with her to discuss immigration matters and seek professional validation of the process I had completed on my own. Unfortunately, during our reunion, she seemed more focused on protecting herself than genuinely assisting me. However, when I attended my USCIS appointment today, everything was in order, and the concerns she raised did not materialize. It was a stressful experience unnecessarily.
Read more
26 Apr, 2024 by Larry hu
I did not have a good experience with the law firm. My main issues is that Boyoon Choi would repeatedly interrupt me and cut me off before I could finish speaking and there were some mannerisms like scoffing (in a subtle but noticeable way) that came off as pretty condescending and I received a general negative feeling from the tone of voice she used with me. She was also 6 minutes late to our Zoom meeting but cut our 30 minute meeting short nonetheless so we really only had 24 minutes together. I'm sure she would probably bill the time for 30 minutes to my MetLife benefits and not the 24 minutes that I actually got. The way I see it, if a client does not have the correct understanding then inform them in a respectful way. Trying to be subtle with mannerisms like quietly scoffing or responding with a negative tone, one that felt a bit indignant towards me feels less like you're working with someone that's trying to advocate for you and more like you're talking to someone that's trying to take out whatever stress she may be having towards you. It seems that no wonder her staff seems to sound a bit on edge over the phone as I can imagine what it can be like to be subjected to that over time.
She also knew that my home is in Snohomish County but told me that she can't help with the eviction process in that area, but took my money through my MetLife benefit anyway. That's pretty messed up.
Lastly, I also felt it was problematic to be told that she did not know the RCW that covered why a 90 day notice to vacate due to sale is not enforceable unless it is specifically mentioned in the lease agreement. When I requested clarification for her to specify how is this the case, she could only tell me it's part of the general landlord tenant rights that a lease agreement has to specify that an early termination can take place due to sale and that this language would not be specifically mentioned due to it being covered under the general umbrella of tenant rights. However, RCW 59.18.650 clearly states it's permissible for a landlord to end a lease agreement early with cause for the purpose of selling a home.
Boyoon Choi should really be careful with giving advice that she clearly does not know the basis for. It is concerning when you ask for the RCW that she does not know it, and scoffs at you while mentioning it's part of the general rights for a tenant.
Anyways, here is what I was told by another source about the permissibility of ending a lease early to sell the home:
In Washington State, typically, if a landlord provides a 90-day notice to vacate for the purpose of selling the property, this is generally considered lawful. In Washington State, the enforceability of a 90-day notice to vacate due to the sale of a property typically does not require a specific clause in the lease agreement stating that sale of the home entails the tenant moving out. The standard process allows landlords to issue such a notice as part of the rights to dispose of their property, assuming other legal and procedural requirements are met (e.g., proper notice period and service).
Lastly, she was also incorrect about my MetLife legal benefit. She said I don't have benefits for litigation as part of my benefit but in my MetLife portal it clearly states: "This service covers the Participant as a landlord for matters involving leases, security deposits and disputes with a residential tenant. The service includes attorney services for the eviction of a tenant up to and including trial."
Read more
11 Jul, 2024 by Kristopher lichtanski
I have had an excellent experience with CCL and Ms. Choi in the matter of a complicated easement / title situation. The office staff was super responsive, appointments were scheduled quickly and in collaboration with my schedule/availability, and the meetings I had with Ms. Choi were focused, organized, and super productive. I felt that Ms. Choi was prepared for the meetings, understood what I was dealing with, and discussed with me multiple options and potential outcomes regarding this legal matter, which is going to end up in Court. I could not have asked for a better attorney for my situation (and I have consulted with others prior to CCL) and I very much look forward to my ongoing work with CCL and Ms. Choi. I recommend CCL and Ms. Choi wholeheartedly!
Read more
05 May, 2024 by Ricardo saenz
I arranged a meeting with her to discuss immigration matters and seek professional validation of the process I had completed on my own. Unfortunately, during our reunion, she seemed more focused on protecting herself than genuinely assisting me. However, when I attended my USCIS appointment today, everything was in order, and the concerns she raised did not materialize. It was a stressful experience unnecessarily.
Read more
26 Apr, 2024 by Larry hu
I did not have a good experience with the law firm. My main issues is that Boyoon Choi would repeatedly interrupt me and cut me off before I could finish speaking and there were some mannerisms like scoffing (in a subtle but noticeable way) that came off as pretty condescending and I received a general negative feeling from the tone of voice she used with me. She was also 6 minutes late to our Zoom meeting but cut our 30 minute meeting short nonetheless so we really only had 24 minutes together. I'm sure she would probably bill the time for 30 minutes to my MetLife benefits and not the 24 minutes that I actually got. The way I see it, if a client does not have the correct understanding then inform them in a respectful way. Trying to be subtle with mannerisms like quietly scoffing or responding with a negative tone, one that felt a bit indignant towards me feels less like you're working with someone that's trying to advocate for you and more like you're talking to someone that's trying to take out whatever stress she may be having towards you. It seems that no wonder her staff seems to sound a bit on edge over the phone as I can imagine what it can be like to be subjected to that over time.
She also knew that my home is in Snohomish County but told me that she can't help with the eviction process in that area, but took my money through my MetLife benefit anyway. That's pretty messed up.
Lastly, I also felt it was problematic to be told that she did not know the RCW that covered why a 90 day notice to vacate due to sale is not enforceable unless it is specifically mentioned in the lease agreement. When I requested clarification for her to specify how is this the case, she could only tell me it's part of the general landlord tenant rights that a lease agreement has to specify that an early termination can take place due to sale and that this language would not be specifically mentioned due to it being covered under the general umbrella of tenant rights. However, RCW 59.18.650 clearly states it's permissible for a landlord to end a lease agreement early with cause for the purpose of selling a home.
Boyoon Choi should really be careful with giving advice that she clearly does not know the basis for. It is concerning when you ask for the RCW that she does not know it, and scoffs at you while mentioning it's part of the general rights for a tenant.
Anyways, here is what I was told by another source about the permissibility of ending a lease early to sell the home:
In Washington State, typically, if a landlord provides a 90-day notice to vacate for the purpose of selling the property, this is generally considered lawful. In Washington State, the enforceability of a 90-day notice to vacate due to the sale of a property typically does not require a specific clause in the lease agreement stating that sale of the home entails the tenant moving out. The standard process allows landlords to issue such a notice as part of the rights to dispose of their property, assuming other legal and procedural requirements are met (e.g., proper notice period and service).
Lastly, she was also incorrect about my MetLife legal benefit. She said I don't have benefits for litigation as part of my benefit but in my MetLife portal it clearly states: "This service covers the Participant as a landlord for matters involving leases, security deposits and disputes with a residential tenant. The service includes attorney services for the eviction of a tenant up to and including trial."
Read more
11 Jul, 2024 by Kristopher lichtanski
I have had an excellent experience with CCL and Ms. Choi in the matter of a complicated easement / title situation. The office staff was super responsive, appointments were scheduled quickly and in collaboration with my schedule/availability, and the meetings I had with Ms. Choi were focused, organized, and super productive. I felt that Ms. Choi was prepared for the meetings, understood what I was dealing with, and discussed with me multiple options and potential outcomes regarding this legal matter, which is going to end up in Court. I could not have asked for a better attorney for my situation (and I have consulted with others prior to CCL) and I very much look forward to my ongoing work with CCL and Ms. Choi. I recommend CCL and Ms. Choi wholeheartedly!
Read more
05 May, 2024 by Ricardo saenz
I arranged a meeting with her to discuss immigration matters and seek professional validation of the process I had completed on my own. Unfortunately, during our reunion, she seemed more focused on protecting herself than genuinely assisting me. However, when I attended my USCIS appointment today, everything was in order, and the concerns she raised did not materialize. It was a stressful experience unnecessarily.
Read more
26 Apr, 2024 by Larry hu
I did not have a good experience with the law firm. My main issues is that Boyoon Choi would repeatedly interrupt me and cut me off before I could finish speaking and there were some mannerisms like scoffing (in a subtle but noticeable way) that came off as pretty condescending and I received a general negative feeling from the tone of voice she used with me. She was also 6 minutes late to our Zoom meeting but cut our 30 minute meeting short nonetheless so we really only had 24 minutes together. I'm sure she would probably bill the time for 30 minutes to my MetLife benefits and not the 24 minutes that I actually got. The way I see it, if a client does not have the correct understanding then inform them in a respectful way. Trying to be subtle with mannerisms like quietly scoffing or responding with a negative tone, one that felt a bit indignant towards me feels less like you're working with someone that's trying to advocate for you and more like you're talking to someone that's trying to take out whatever stress she may be having towards you. It seems that no wonder her staff seems to sound a bit on edge over the phone as I can imagine what it can be like to be subjected to that over time.
She also knew that my home is in Snohomish County but told me that she can't help with the eviction process in that area, but took my money through my MetLife benefit anyway. That's pretty messed up.
Lastly, I also felt it was problematic to be told that she did not know the RCW that covered why a 90 day notice to vacate due to sale is not enforceable unless it is specifically mentioned in the lease agreement. When I requested clarification for her to specify how is this the case, she could only tell me it's part of the general landlord tenant rights that a lease agreement has to specify that an early termination can take place due to sale and that this language would not be specifically mentioned due to it being covered under the general umbrella of tenant rights. However, RCW 59.18.650 clearly states it's permissible for a landlord to end a lease agreement early with cause for the purpose of selling a home.
Boyoon Choi should really be careful with giving advice that she clearly does not know the basis for. It is concerning when you ask for the RCW that she does not know it, and scoffs at you while mentioning it's part of the general rights for a tenant.
Anyways, here is what I was told by another source about the permissibility of ending a lease early to sell the home:
In Washington State, typically, if a landlord provides a 90-day notice to vacate for the purpose of selling the property, this is generally considered lawful. In Washington State, the enforceability of a 90-day notice to vacate due to the sale of a property typically does not require a specific clause in the lease agreement stating that sale of the home entails the tenant moving out. The standard process allows landlords to issue such a notice as part of the rights to dispose of their property, assuming other legal and procedural requirements are met (e.g., proper notice period and service).
Lastly, she was also incorrect about my MetLife legal benefit. She said I don't have benefits for litigation as part of my benefit but in my MetLife portal it clearly states: "This service covers the Participant as a landlord for matters involving leases, security deposits and disputes with a residential tenant. The service includes attorney services for the eviction of a tenant up to and including trial."
Read more
11 Jul, 2024 by Kristopher lichtanski
I have had an excellent experience with CCL and Ms. Choi in the matter of a complicated easement / title situation. The office staff was super responsive, appointments were scheduled quickly and in collaboration with my schedule/availability, and the meetings I had with Ms. Choi were focused, organized, and super productive. I felt that Ms. Choi was prepared for the meetings, understood what I was dealing with, and discussed with me multiple options and potential outcomes regarding this legal matter, which is going to end up in Court. I could not have asked for a better attorney for my situation (and I have consulted with others prior to CCL) and I very much look forward to my ongoing work with CCL and Ms. Choi. I recommend CCL and Ms. Choi wholeheartedly!
Read more
05 May, 2024 by Ricardo saenz
I arranged a meeting with her to discuss immigration matters and seek professional validation of the process I had completed on my own. Unfortunately, during our reunion, she seemed more focused on protecting herself than genuinely assisting me. However, when I attended my USCIS appointment today, everything was in order, and the concerns she raised did not materialize. It was a stressful experience unnecessarily.
Read more
26 Apr, 2024 by Larry hu
I did not have a good experience with the law firm. My main issues is that Boyoon Choi would repeatedly interrupt me and cut me off before I could finish speaking and there were some mannerisms like scoffing (in a subtle but noticeable way) that came off as pretty condescending and I received a general negative feeling from the tone of voice she used with me. She was also 6 minutes late to our Zoom meeting but cut our 30 minute meeting short nonetheless so we really only had 24 minutes together. I'm sure she would probably bill the time for 30 minutes to my MetLife benefits and not the 24 minutes that I actually got. The way I see it, if a client does not have the correct understanding then inform them in a respectful way. Trying to be subtle with mannerisms like quietly scoffing or responding with a negative tone, one that felt a bit indignant towards me feels less like you're working with someone that's trying to advocate for you and more like you're talking to someone that's trying to take out whatever stress she may be having towards you. It seems that no wonder her staff seems to sound a bit on edge over the phone as I can imagine what it can be like to be subjected to that over time.
She also knew that my home is in Snohomish County but told me that she can't help with the eviction process in that area, but took my money through my MetLife benefit anyway. That's pretty messed up.
Lastly, I also felt it was problematic to be told that she did not know the RCW that covered why a 90 day notice to vacate due to sale is not enforceable unless it is specifically mentioned in the lease agreement. When I requested clarification for her to specify how is this the case, she could only tell me it's part of the general landlord tenant rights that a lease agreement has to specify that an early termination can take place due to sale and that this language would not be specifically mentioned due to it being covered under the general umbrella of tenant rights. However, RCW 59.18.650 clearly states it's permissible for a landlord to end a lease agreement early with cause for the purpose of selling a home.
Boyoon Choi should really be careful with giving advice that she clearly does not know the basis for. It is concerning when you ask for the RCW that she does not know it, and scoffs at you while mentioning it's part of the general rights for a tenant.
Anyways, here is what I was told by another source about the permissibility of ending a lease early to sell the home:
In Washington State, typically, if a landlord provides a 90-day notice to vacate for the purpose of selling the property, this is generally considered lawful. In Washington State, the enforceability of a 90-day notice to vacate due to the sale of a property typically does not require a specific clause in the lease agreement stating that sale of the home entails the tenant moving out. The standard process allows landlords to issue such a notice as part of the rights to dispose of their property, assuming other legal and procedural requirements are met (e.g., proper notice period and service).
Lastly, she was also incorrect about my MetLife legal benefit. She said I don't have benefits for litigation as part of my benefit but in my MetLife portal it clearly states: "This service covers the Participant as a landlord for matters involving leases, security deposits and disputes with a residential tenant. The service includes attorney services for the eviction of a tenant up to and including trial."
Read more
11 Jul, 2024 by Kristopher lichtanski
I have had an excellent experience with CCL and Ms. Choi in the matter of a complicated easement / title situation. The office staff was super responsive, appointments were scheduled quickly and in collaboration with my schedule/availability, and the meetings I had with Ms. Choi were focused, organized, and super productive. I felt that Ms. Choi was prepared for the meetings, understood what I was dealing with, and discussed with me multiple options and potential outcomes regarding this legal matter, which is going to end up in Court. I could not have asked for a better attorney for my situation (and I have consulted with others prior to CCL) and I very much look forward to my ongoing work with CCL and Ms. Choi. I recommend CCL and Ms. Choi wholeheartedly!
Read more
05 May, 2024 by Ricardo saenz
I arranged a meeting with her to discuss immigration matters and seek professional validation of the process I had completed on my own. Unfortunately, during our reunion, she seemed more focused on protecting herself than genuinely assisting me. However, when I attended my USCIS appointment today, everything was in order, and the concerns she raised did not materialize. It was a stressful experience unnecessarily.
Read more
26 Apr, 2024 by Larry hu
I did not have a good experience with the law firm. My main issues is that Boyoon Choi would repeatedly interrupt me and cut me off before I could finish speaking and there were some mannerisms like scoffing (in a subtle but noticeable way) that came off as pretty condescending and I received a general negative feeling from the tone of voice she used with me. She was also 6 minutes late to our Zoom meeting but cut our 30 minute meeting short nonetheless so we really only had 24 minutes together. I'm sure she would probably bill the time for 30 minutes to my MetLife benefits and not the 24 minutes that I actually got. The way I see it, if a client does not have the correct understanding then inform them in a respectful way. Trying to be subtle with mannerisms like quietly scoffing or responding with a negative tone, one that felt a bit indignant towards me feels less like you're working with someone that's trying to advocate for you and more like you're talking to someone that's trying to take out whatever stress she may be having towards you. It seems that no wonder her staff seems to sound a bit on edge over the phone as I can imagine what it can be like to be subjected to that over time.
She also knew that my home is in Snohomish County but told me that she can't help with the eviction process in that area, but took my money through my MetLife benefit anyway. That's pretty messed up.
Lastly, I also felt it was problematic to be told that she did not know the RCW that covered why a 90 day notice to vacate due to sale is not enforceable unless it is specifically mentioned in the lease agreement. When I requested clarification for her to specify how is this the case, she could only tell me it's part of the general landlord tenant rights that a lease agreement has to specify that an early termination can take place due to sale and that this language would not be specifically mentioned due to it being covered under the general umbrella of tenant rights. However, RCW 59.18.650 clearly states it's permissible for a landlord to end a lease agreement early with cause for the purpose of selling a home.
Boyoon Choi should really be careful with giving advice that she clearly does not know the basis for. It is concerning when you ask for the RCW that she does not know it, and scoffs at you while mentioning it's part of the general rights for a tenant.
Anyways, here is what I was told by another source about the permissibility of ending a lease early to sell the home:
In Washington State, typically, if a landlord provides a 90-day notice to vacate for the purpose of selling the property, this is generally considered lawful. In Washington State, the enforceability of a 90-day notice to vacate due to the sale of a property typically does not require a specific clause in the lease agreement stating that sale of the home entails the tenant moving out. The standard process allows landlords to issue such a notice as part of the rights to dispose of their property, assuming other legal and procedural requirements are met (e.g., proper notice period and service).
Lastly, she was also incorrect about my MetLife legal benefit. She said I don't have benefits for litigation as part of my benefit but in my MetLife portal it clearly states: "This service covers the Participant as a landlord for matters involving leases, security deposits and disputes with a residential tenant. The service includes attorney services for the eviction of a tenant up to and including trial."
Read more
11 Jul, 2024 by Kristopher lichtanski
I have had an excellent experience with CCL and Ms. Choi in the matter of a complicated easement / title situation. The office staff was super responsive, appointments were scheduled quickly and in collaboration with my schedule/availability, and the meetings I had with Ms. Choi were focused, organized, and super productive. I felt that Ms. Choi was prepared for the meetings, understood what I was dealing with, and discussed with me multiple options and potential outcomes regarding this legal matter, which is going to end up in Court. I could not have asked for a better attorney for my situation (and I have consulted with others prior to CCL) and I very much look forward to my ongoing work with CCL and Ms. Choi. I recommend CCL and Ms. Choi wholeheartedly!
Read more
05 May, 2024 by Ricardo saenz
I arranged a meeting with her to discuss immigration matters and seek professional validation of the process I had completed on my own. Unfortunately, during our reunion, she seemed more focused on protecting herself than genuinely assisting me. However, when I attended my USCIS appointment today, everything was in order, and the concerns she raised did not materialize. It was a stressful experience unnecessarily.
Read more
26 Apr, 2024 by Larry hu
I did not have a good experience with the law firm. My main issues is that Boyoon Choi would repeatedly interrupt me and cut me off before I could finish speaking and there were some mannerisms like scoffing (in a subtle but noticeable way) that came off as pretty condescending and I received a general negative feeling from the tone of voice she used with me. She was also 6 minutes late to our Zoom meeting but cut our 30 minute meeting short nonetheless so we really only had 24 minutes together. I'm sure she would probably bill the time for 30 minutes to my MetLife benefits and not the 24 minutes that I actually got. The way I see it, if a client does not have the correct understanding then inform them in a respectful way. Trying to be subtle with mannerisms like quietly scoffing or responding with a negative tone, one that felt a bit indignant towards me feels less like you're working with someone that's trying to advocate for you and more like you're talking to someone that's trying to take out whatever stress she may be having towards you. It seems that no wonder her staff seems to sound a bit on edge over the phone as I can imagine what it can be like to be subjected to that over time.
She also knew that my home is in Snohomish County but told me that she can't help with the eviction process in that area, but took my money through my MetLife benefit anyway. That's pretty messed up.
Lastly, I also felt it was problematic to be told that she did not know the RCW that covered why a 90 day notice to vacate due to sale is not enforceable unless it is specifically mentioned in the lease agreement. When I requested clarification for her to specify how is this the case, she could only tell me it's part of the general landlord tenant rights that a lease agreement has to specify that an early termination can take place due to sale and that this language would not be specifically mentioned due to it being covered under the general umbrella of tenant rights. However, RCW 59.18.650 clearly states it's permissible for a landlord to end a lease agreement early with cause for the purpose of selling a home.
Boyoon Choi should really be careful with giving advice that she clearly does not know the basis for. It is concerning when you ask for the RCW that she does not know it, and scoffs at you while mentioning it's part of the general rights for a tenant.
Anyways, here is what I was told by another source about the permissibility of ending a lease early to sell the home:
In Washington State, typically, if a landlord provides a 90-day notice to vacate for the purpose of selling the property, this is generally considered lawful. In Washington State, the enforceability of a 90-day notice to vacate due to the sale of a property typically does not require a specific clause in the lease agreement stating that sale of the home entails the tenant moving out. The standard process allows landlords to issue such a notice as part of the rights to dispose of their property, assuming other legal and procedural requirements are met (e.g., proper notice period and service).
Lastly, she was also incorrect about my MetLife legal benefit. She said I don't have benefits for litigation as part of my benefit but in my MetLife portal it clearly states: "This service covers the Participant as a landlord for matters involving leases, security deposits and disputes with a residential tenant. The service includes attorney services for the eviction of a tenant up to and including trial."
Read more
11 Jul, 2024 by Kristopher lichtanski
I have had an excellent experience with CCL and Ms. Choi in the matter of a complicated easement / title situation. The office staff was super responsive, appointments were scheduled quickly and in collaboration with my schedule/availability, and the meetings I had with Ms. Choi were focused, organized, and super productive. I felt that Ms. Choi was prepared for the meetings, understood what I was dealing with, and discussed with me multiple options and potential outcomes regarding this legal matter, which is going to end up in Court. I could not have asked for a better attorney for my situation (and I have consulted with others prior to CCL) and I very much look forward to my ongoing work with CCL and Ms. Choi. I recommend CCL and Ms. Choi wholeheartedly!
Read more
05 May, 2024 by Ricardo saenz
I arranged a meeting with her to discuss immigration matters and seek professional validation of the process I had completed on my own. Unfortunately, during our reunion, she seemed more focused on protecting herself than genuinely assisting me. However, when I attended my USCIS appointment today, everything was in order, and the concerns she raised did not materialize. It was a stressful experience unnecessarily.
Read more
26 Apr, 2024 by Larry hu
I did not have a good experience with the law firm. My main issues is that Boyoon Choi would repeatedly interrupt me and cut me off before I could finish speaking and there were some mannerisms like scoffing (in a subtle but noticeable way) that came off as pretty condescending and I received a general negative feeling from the tone of voice she used with me. She was also 6 minutes late to our Zoom meeting but cut our 30 minute meeting short nonetheless so we really only had 24 minutes together. I'm sure she would probably bill the time for 30 minutes to my MetLife benefits and not the 24 minutes that I actually got. The way I see it, if a client does not have the correct understanding then inform them in a respectful way. Trying to be subtle with mannerisms like quietly scoffing or responding with a negative tone, one that felt a bit indignant towards me feels less like you're working with someone that's trying to advocate for you and more like you're talking to someone that's trying to take out whatever stress she may be having towards you. It seems that no wonder her staff seems to sound a bit on edge over the phone as I can imagine what it can be like to be subjected to that over time.
She also knew that my home is in Snohomish County but told me that she can't help with the eviction process in that area, but took my money through my MetLife benefit anyway. That's pretty messed up.
Lastly, I also felt it was problematic to be told that she did not know the RCW that covered why a 90 day notice to vacate due to sale is not enforceable unless it is specifically mentioned in the lease agreement. When I requested clarification for her to specify how is this the case, she could only tell me it's part of the general landlord tenant rights that a lease agreement has to specify that an early termination can take place due to sale and that this language would not be specifically mentioned due to it being covered under the general umbrella of tenant rights. However, RCW 59.18.650 clearly states it's permissible for a landlord to end a lease agreement early with cause for the purpose of selling a home.
Boyoon Choi should really be careful with giving advice that she clearly does not know the basis for. It is concerning when you ask for the RCW that she does not know it, and scoffs at you while mentioning it's part of the general rights for a tenant.
Anyways, here is what I was told by another source about the permissibility of ending a lease early to sell the home:
In Washington State, typically, if a landlord provides a 90-day notice to vacate for the purpose of selling the property, this is generally considered lawful. In Washington State, the enforceability of a 90-day notice to vacate due to the sale of a property typically does not require a specific clause in the lease agreement stating that sale of the home entails the tenant moving out. The standard process allows landlords to issue such a notice as part of the rights to dispose of their property, assuming other legal and procedural requirements are met (e.g., proper notice period and service).
Lastly, she was also incorrect about my MetLife legal benefit. She said I don't have benefits for litigation as part of my benefit but in my MetLife portal it clearly states: "This service covers the Participant as a landlord for matters involving leases, security deposits and disputes with a residential tenant. The service includes attorney services for the eviction of a tenant up to and including trial."
Read more
11 Jul, 2024 by Kristopher lichtanski
I have had an excellent experience with CCL and Ms. Choi in the matter of a complicated easement / title situation. The office staff was super responsive, appointments were scheduled quickly and in collaboration with my schedule/availability, and the meetings I had with Ms. Choi were focused, organized, and super productive. I felt that Ms. Choi was prepared for the meetings, understood what I was dealing with, and discussed with me multiple options and potential outcomes regarding this legal matter, which is going to end up in Court. I could not have asked for a better attorney for my situation (and I have consulted with others prior to CCL) and I very much look forward to my ongoing work with CCL and Ms. Choi. I recommend CCL and Ms. Choi wholeheartedly!
Read more
05 May, 2024 by Ricardo saenz
I arranged a meeting with her to discuss immigration matters and seek professional validation of the process I had completed on my own. Unfortunately, during our reunion, she seemed more focused on protecting herself than genuinely assisting me. However, when I attended my USCIS appointment today, everything was in order, and the concerns she raised did not materialize. It was a stressful experience unnecessarily.
Read more
26 Apr, 2024 by Larry hu
I did not have a good experience with the law firm. My main issues is that Boyoon Choi would repeatedly interrupt me and cut me off before I could finish speaking and there were some mannerisms like scoffing (in a subtle but noticeable way) that came off as pretty condescending and I received a general negative feeling from the tone of voice she used with me. She was also 6 minutes late to our Zoom meeting but cut our 30 minute meeting short nonetheless so we really only had 24 minutes together. I'm sure she would probably bill the time for 30 minutes to my MetLife benefits and not the 24 minutes that I actually got. The way I see it, if a client does not have the correct understanding then inform them in a respectful way. Trying to be subtle with mannerisms like quietly scoffing or responding with a negative tone, one that felt a bit indignant towards me feels less like you're working with someone that's trying to advocate for you and more like you're talking to someone that's trying to take out whatever stress she may be having towards you. It seems that no wonder her staff seems to sound a bit on edge over the phone as I can imagine what it can be like to be subjected to that over time.
She also knew that my home is in Snohomish County but told me that she can't help with the eviction process in that area, but took my money through my MetLife benefit anyway. That's pretty messed up.
Lastly, I also felt it was problematic to be told that she did not know the RCW that covered why a 90 day notice to vacate due to sale is not enforceable unless it is specifically mentioned in the lease agreement. When I requested clarification for her to specify how is this the case, she could only tell me it's part of the general landlord tenant rights that a lease agreement has to specify that an early termination can take place due to sale and that this language would not be specifically mentioned due to it being covered under the general umbrella of tenant rights. However, RCW 59.18.650 clearly states it's permissible for a landlord to end a lease agreement early with cause for the purpose of selling a home.
Boyoon Choi should really be careful with giving advice that she clearly does not know the basis for. It is concerning when you ask for the RCW that she does not know it, and scoffs at you while mentioning it's part of the general rights for a tenant.
Anyways, here is what I was told by another source about the permissibility of ending a lease early to sell the home:
In Washington State, typically, if a landlord provides a 90-day notice to vacate for the purpose of selling the property, this is generally considered lawful. In Washington State, the enforceability of a 90-day notice to vacate due to the sale of a property typically does not require a specific clause in the lease agreement stating that sale of the home entails the tenant moving out. The standard process allows landlords to issue such a notice as part of the rights to dispose of their property, assuming other legal and procedural requirements are met (e.g., proper notice period and service).
Lastly, she was also incorrect about my MetLife legal benefit. She said I don't have benefits for litigation as part of my benefit but in my MetLife portal it clearly states: "This service covers the Participant as a landlord for matters involving leases, security deposits and disputes with a residential tenant. The service includes attorney services for the eviction of a tenant up to and including trial."
Read more
11 Jul, 2024 by Kristopher lichtanski
I have had an excellent experience with CCL and Ms. Choi in the matter of a complicated easement / title situation. The office staff was super responsive, appointments were scheduled quickly and in collaboration with my schedule/availability, and the meetings I had with Ms. Choi were focused, organized, and super productive. I felt that Ms. Choi was prepared for the meetings, understood what I was dealing with, and discussed with me multiple options and potential outcomes regarding this legal matter, which is going to end up in Court. I could not have asked for a better attorney for my situation (and I have consulted with others prior to CCL) and I very much look forward to my ongoing work with CCL and Ms. Choi. I recommend CCL and Ms. Choi wholeheartedly!
Read more
05 May, 2024 by Ricardo saenz
I arranged a meeting with her to discuss immigration matters and seek professional validation of the process I had completed on my own. Unfortunately, during our reunion, she seemed more focused on protecting herself than genuinely assisting me. However, when I attended my USCIS appointment today, everything was in order, and the concerns she raised did not materialize. It was a stressful experience unnecessarily.
Read more
26 Apr, 2024 by Larry hu
I did not have a good experience with the law firm. My main issues is that Boyoon Choi would repeatedly interrupt me and cut me off before I could finish speaking and there were some mannerisms like scoffing (in a subtle but noticeable way) that came off as pretty condescending and I received a general negative feeling from the tone of voice she used with me. She was also 6 minutes late to our Zoom meeting but cut our 30 minute meeting short nonetheless so we really only had 24 minutes together. I'm sure she would probably bill the time for 30 minutes to my MetLife benefits and not the 24 minutes that I actually got. The way I see it, if a client does not have the correct understanding then inform them in a respectful way. Trying to be subtle with mannerisms like quietly scoffing or responding with a negative tone, one that felt a bit indignant towards me feels less like you're working with someone that's trying to advocate for you and more like you're talking to someone that's trying to take out whatever stress she may be having towards you. It seems that no wonder her staff seems to sound a bit on edge over the phone as I can imagine what it can be like to be subjected to that over time.
She also knew that my home is in Snohomish County but told me that she can't help with the eviction process in that area, but took my money through my MetLife benefit anyway. That's pretty messed up.
Lastly, I also felt it was problematic to be told that she did not know the RCW that covered why a 90 day notice to vacate due to sale is not enforceable unless it is specifically mentioned in the lease agreement. When I requested clarification for her to specify how is this the case, she could only tell me it's part of the general landlord tenant rights that a lease agreement has to specify that an early termination can take place due to sale and that this language would not be specifically mentioned due to it being covered under the general umbrella of tenant rights. However, RCW 59.18.650 clearly states it's permissible for a landlord to end a lease agreement early with cause for the purpose of selling a home.
Boyoon Choi should really be careful with giving advice that she clearly does not know the basis for. It is concerning when you ask for the RCW that she does not know it, and scoffs at you while mentioning it's part of the general rights for a tenant.
Anyways, here is what I was told by another source about the permissibility of ending a lease early to sell the home:
In Washington State, typically, if a landlord provides a 90-day notice to vacate for the purpose of selling the property, this is generally considered lawful. In Washington State, the enforceability of a 90-day notice to vacate due to the sale of a property typically does not require a specific clause in the lease agreement stating that sale of the home entails the tenant moving out. The standard process allows landlords to issue such a notice as part of the rights to dispose of their property, assuming other legal and procedural requirements are met (e.g., proper notice period and service).
Lastly, she was also incorrect about my MetLife legal benefit. She said I don't have benefits for litigation as part of my benefit but in my MetLife portal it clearly states: "This service covers the Participant as a landlord for matters involving leases, security deposits and disputes with a residential tenant. The service includes attorney services for the eviction of a tenant up to and including trial."
Read more
11 Jul, 2024 by Kristopher lichtanski
I have had an excellent experience with CCL and Ms. Choi in the matter of a complicated easement / title situation. The office staff was super responsive, appointments were scheduled quickly and in collaboration with my schedule/availability, and the meetings I had with Ms. Choi were focused, organized, and super productive. I felt that Ms. Choi was prepared for the meetings, understood what I was dealing with, and discussed with me multiple options and potential outcomes regarding this legal matter, which is going to end up in Court. I could not have asked for a better attorney for my situation (and I have consulted with others prior to CCL) and I very much look forward to my ongoing work with CCL and Ms. Choi. I recommend CCL and Ms. Choi wholeheartedly!
Read more
05 May, 2024 by Ricardo saenz
I arranged a meeting with her to discuss immigration matters and seek professional validation of the process I had completed on my own. Unfortunately, during our reunion, she seemed more focused on protecting herself than genuinely assisting me. However, when I attended my USCIS appointment today, everything was in order, and the concerns she raised did not materialize. It was a stressful experience unnecessarily.
Read more
26 Apr, 2024 by Larry hu
I did not have a good experience with the law firm. My main issues is that Boyoon Choi would repeatedly interrupt me and cut me off before I could finish speaking and there were some mannerisms like scoffing (in a subtle but noticeable way) that came off as pretty condescending and I received a general negative feeling from the tone of voice she used with me. She was also 6 minutes late to our Zoom meeting but cut our 30 minute meeting short nonetheless so we really only had 24 minutes together. I'm sure she would probably bill the time for 30 minutes to my MetLife benefits and not the 24 minutes that I actually got. The way I see it, if a client does not have the correct understanding then inform them in a respectful way. Trying to be subtle with mannerisms like quietly scoffing or responding with a negative tone, one that felt a bit indignant towards me feels less like you're working with someone that's trying to advocate for you and more like you're talking to someone that's trying to take out whatever stress she may be having towards you. It seems that no wonder her staff seems to sound a bit on edge over the phone as I can imagine what it can be like to be subjected to that over time.
She also knew that my home is in Snohomish County but told me that she can't help with the eviction process in that area, but took my money through my MetLife benefit anyway. That's pretty messed up.
Lastly, I also felt it was problematic to be told that she did not know the RCW that covered why a 90 day notice to vacate due to sale is not enforceable unless it is specifically mentioned in the lease agreement. When I requested clarification for her to specify how is this the case, she could only tell me it's part of the general landlord tenant rights that a lease agreement has to specify that an early termination can take place due to sale and that this language would not be specifically mentioned due to it being covered under the general umbrella of tenant rights. However, RCW 59.18.650 clearly states it's permissible for a landlord to end a lease agreement early with cause for the purpose of selling a home.
Boyoon Choi should really be careful with giving advice that she clearly does not know the basis for. It is concerning when you ask for the RCW that she does not know it, and scoffs at you while mentioning it's part of the general rights for a tenant.
Anyways, here is what I was told by another source about the permissibility of ending a lease early to sell the home:
In Washington State, typically, if a landlord provides a 90-day notice to vacate for the purpose of selling the property, this is generally considered lawful. In Washington State, the enforceability of a 90-day notice to vacate due to the sale of a property typically does not require a specific clause in the lease agreement stating that sale of the home entails the tenant moving out. The standard process allows landlords to issue such a notice as part of the rights to dispose of their property, assuming other legal and procedural requirements are met (e.g., proper notice period and service).
Lastly, she was also incorrect about my MetLife legal benefit. She said I don't have benefits for litigation as part of my benefit but in my MetLife portal it clearly states: "This service covers the Participant as a landlord for matters involving leases, security deposits and disputes with a residential tenant. The service includes attorney services for the eviction of a tenant up to and including trial."
Read more
09 Apr, 2024 by Dee tee
06 May, 2024 by Dennard wilson
So far we’re just beginning,so I really don’t know what to say!!!!
Read more
06 May, 2024 by Clarissa hale
The service is very helpful and I appreciate you all. Thank you
Read more
06 May, 2024 by Timothy klug (timo)
Very pleasant to talk to, cared about the status of my claim, someone really cares about you.
Read more
14 Sep, 2017 by Anonymous
I have waited five years to write this review. I hired Ruth Edlund halfway through my divorce to only concentrate on the parenting part of the case. I had received a less than favorable parent eval. and asked her to dispute the false accusations and lies as I had been a stay at home mom for 13 years and a teacher with a masters degree. I kept the former attorney on as well to work on the financial piece of the case. Ruth didn't listen to my concerns, wanted to create a new case which involved hiring a forensic psychiatrist and other expert witnesses that could testify in court. This not only drove the bill up, but instead of contesting false accusations she was agreeing to them and wanting me to be diagnosed with a mental illness that didn't exist in the first place. She ultimately didn't want to go to trial and in the end after mediation my ex husbands attorney filed an emergency hearing accusing me of more false accusations. Ruth failed to read the documents the morning of the hearing and we got killed because she didn't know how to fight back. She didn't object to the false testimony and we took a beating. I was then forced to sign a parenting plan and financial plan together which was to release a temp. restraining order the other party filed frivolously against me to see my children. I didn't know the dysfunction of family law at that time and agreed to sign my life away to see my three children. Five years later I do know the ins and out of family law and I know Ruth took advantage of me and did not represent me fairly or adequately. Documents were changed without my consent and agreements were changed without my approval. I tried for years to reach her to question and confront her regarding the malpractice situation. I was always directed to voicemail and she would deny any wrong doing via email. I recently heard she is no longer with Weschler Becker which is a step in the right direction. Ruth overcharged me and ultimately misrepresented me in a fairly straight forward contested divorce that the average attorney could have handled. Its a shame one person can do so much damage to the lives of others. Ruth should not be practicing law.
Read more
29 Jan, 2017 by Anonymous
Ruth represented me in my divorce case but was unprepared and unorganized. She did not prepare me for trial, failed to object or challenge the opposing counsel during hearings for obvious misstatements. Ruth was lax in filing final orders and did not accurately highlight the mental illness and abuse of my former husband which ultimately caused trauma to my children and unnecessary delays and hardship. Then she over billed me and refused to complete my case so I was required to act alone until another attorney stepped in to represent my and my children's best interest. Ruth is only interested in self promotion and financial gain.
Read more
20 Jun, 2014 by Suzanne
Ms Edlund represented me in a child custody case. Even with solid proof of my husbands mental illness and abusive nature she was unable to get me the custody i desired. She claims to be the most knowledgable and respected lawyer in the area but I saw nothing close to that in my interaction with her. The best thing about her is her strong relationship with several family court judges. Many of which are in "awe" of her high profile firm. This unfortunately didn't help me to get the sole custody I wanted with my "Little Boo"
Read more
06 Nov, 2023 by Abin nellams
It was great to speak to the actual attorney. Professionalism at the highest level.
Read more
11 Sep, 2023 by Cassieopia toro
21 Jun, 2023 by Michael kirk
Gave me great counseling.
Read more
30 Jan, 2020 by Anonymous
We hired Michele to assist us in a misdemeanor case involving our adult son. She was diligent, thoughtful in her approach to the case, and was able to resolve the matter to our grateful satisfaction.
Read more
25 Oct, 2018 by Anonymous
I hired this attorney to work on a highly emotional case. She immediately criticized me, and attempting to scare me with what turned out to be false information about my case. She also did very little work to investigate the actual facts and claimed I was facing jail time when in fact the next lawyer I hired made it clear that was never a risk. She pretended to do work while mostly just trying to scare me and get me to think she was all that was standing between me and jail. She also did no work to dig into the facts the prosecutor had and base my defense on the inaccuracies and breaches in protocol from the prosecutor. My next attorney was actually competent, realistic, respectful, and collaborated with me to a completely successful defense. I was not aware of just how unprofessional Michele was until I had competent representation. Scaring clients and not doing work only to make more money is unethical and unhelpful. Go and hire someone who will care about your defense, do the work, get the facts, and not only motivated to increase your fees to her. Would give a minus star if I could.
Read more
02 Oct, 2017 by George artem
Michele was hired by my family in order to help me with a so called felony. Did the bare minimum to scrape by.
Had to eventually change my name because of the nature of the charges. This was three years ago and I still get flack over it.
Read more
16 Nov, 2021 by Travis
I hired Matthew in February '21 to do my divorce paperwork and be a plan B if things went left with my Ex. Matt said he would try to get me on a $5k retainer but billing asked for $10k.
Matthew seemed empathetic at first. He had a calm demeanor and gave the impression he would be invested in getting me through the process.
I gave my Ex an initial offer. She counter-offered asking for 3x the amount. One that would never be held up in court but I didn't know that. Matt did not tell me that. He told me two things. I couldn't afford to have him negotiate on my behalf and she could make it much worse. My best bet was to stick with him and do the negotiations myself.
I did that, I negotiated a deal I should have never have entertained. I waited on Matthew to provide the final paperwork. This is where his apathy and incompetence saved me. It gave me time to double check and talk to other attorneys.
I didn't get my paperwork when Matthew said I would, so I fired him. Billing let me know that Matthew had spent my $10k in all two months. They hounded me for $500 more as I "overspent" on my services.
I let them know I would cover it if Matthew could explain how his initial estimate of < $5k ended up costing me over double that. Matthew never responded. I recently reached out to him and asked again. I asked for an explanation and a discussion on a refund of any amount.
Matthew does not care about you if he knows he's already sucked you dry. I have never been treated so inhumanly by someone I was paying.
I hired a different lawyer who cut my alimony in half. He did in less than 30 minutes with my exes lawyer and $3k.
If you have millions in property, then Matthew is your guy. If you're reading this and realizing you made a mistake, it is never too late to fire your lawyer.
Read more
03 Jan, 2021 by Anonymous
Matthew represented me in a divorce case for several months until mediation was completed. Having worked with one attorney prior to Matthew (pro-se divorce consultation), and one attorney after (representing me in trial), I can comparatively say I had a very poor experience with Matthew. While Matthew is very warm, empathetic, and agreeable and works at a "big-name" firm (things that brought me to Matthew), I found that he was not a strong advocate for me, was challenging to work with, and was significantly more expensive compared to my other attorneys (even the one who prepared for and spent 3.5 days in trial with me).
Specific issues:
(1) I asked Matthew to simply argue the data - that I couldn't afford what the opposing party wanted. But he didn't share this data or even my budget with the opposing party, and I believe this hurt me. We simply weren't aligned on strategy - to use data and facts (like what I earned and could afford to give) to argue the case, vs using his preferred tactic to let other parties go first w/ no info, then countering lower and then seeing where you land. This strategy had very little effect at moving the opposing party towards realistic numbers.
(2) Matthew didn't advocate against a mediator becoming biased and actively inflating the opposing parties expenses and budget.
(3) Matthew often told me to take bad deals I literally couldn't afford because he thought a court might possibly make a more adverse decision. I really just wanted him to fight for something that even got me to a $0 end of month budget (vs. something that put me in the negative).
(4) Matthew was often not responsive to emails or phone calls for days to weeks at a time. Requests to improve this didn't change his behavior in a lasting way.
(5) I asked to hold meetings to discuss strategy and next steps, but often couldn't schedule these until the day or day before arguments/documents/proposals were due. We were ill-prepared and I was ill-prepared because I didn't know what was coming
(6) Matthew didn't provide clarity into upcoming bills (despite asking for this). I was surprised by how quickly large retainers were spent, and it was frustrating to see how much of the retainer was spent on printing huge binders never used, overhead costs you pre-agree to, and other firm employees I never met.
(7) I eventually let Matthew go (in writing and via voicemail), but was invoiced for activities completed after I let Matthew go. It took months to successfully get the firm to drop the charges.
I had none of these issues with my other attorneys. While I know Matthew couldn't control the outcome of my case, the process of working with him was very frustrating, and the cost was egregious when I compare the efficiency and pleasure I had of working with my other attorneys.
Read more
22 Nov, 2019 by Anonymous
This review is difficult for me to share, but I feel I have to do it so at least others might be able to benefit from it. Matt simply was not a zealous advocate for me in my divorce. I gave him the benefit of the doubt for a while because he had started out well. After a month or so, though, Matt became passive and barely did any work. For a while he wasn't really billing, so initially the expenses weren't very high, but by the end I was paying thousands and seeing little movement on my case.
My divorce was straightforward; no kids, just division of a handful of assets. It dragged on for well over a year though. Opposing counsel, on behalf of my ex, would deliberately obfuscate and stall, and when faced with this, Matt simply accepted it. He did not push for transparency, did not find ways to push opposing counsel toward an end, and also did very little work himself. Weeks would go by with no communication from Matt, and when I'd reach out to check in, he would often times not respond. One time he disappeared for almost a month. I reached out to him three times to check in and ask if there was anything I could do to help move things forward, and he only responded after I told him I'd have to find other representation since my case was obviously not a priority for him. Despite his assurances, his behavior did not change.
A few times, Matt told me he was going to start work on something, then never did it. For example, opposing counsel sent us a settlement proposal and Matt told me he would get working on a counter-proposal right away. After 3 months and several attempts on my part to push or ask if I could help, there was still no counter-proposal from Matt.
Finally, I requested mediation (an extra cost) in an effort to force an end myself. The mediation was a full day. Matt's representation was fair, and we were able to negotiate the high points, although I now wonder if another attorney would have done better for me on those. At the end there were some details still open, and I tried to ask about them. Matt was in a hurry to leave and was dismissive of my questions, packing up while I was talking to him. I was uncomfortable signing the agreement, but I decided to trust that Matt wouldn't leave anything important hanging. It turns out I misunderstood an essential piece that I would not have agreed to if Matt had explained it to me properly. He also left a loophole that my ex exploited, which left me in financial limbo for what turned out to be months after the settlement.
When weeks turned into months after the settlement and there was no end in sight, I had to let Matt go. I retained someone else to finish the divorce (several thousand additional dollars that I really couldn't spare), and my new attorney was able to wrap it up within a few weeks of coming on board, despite encountering the same difficulties with opposing counsel that Matt had. She was just more proactive and wouldn't accept their tactics.
To add insult to injury, Matt's firm charged me interest on my outstanding bill, which took a few months for me to be able to pay due to the loophole Matt had left in my agreement.
Unfortunately, my experience was so frustrating that I can't recommend Matt or McKinley Irvin. Divorce is already one of the worst times in people's lives, and my ordeal with them just compounded it. I hope they're able to offer a better experience to future clients.
Read more
08 Oct, 2022 by Cal mcdonald, p.i.
Steve Teller represented me on a case that we closed just today. While I don't know him well (yet), I am extremely impressed with both his persona and practice. He went out of his way to be extraordinarily respectful of some of my differences, and genuinely fought hard for me. Our opponent on the case was a massive corporation that had first wronged me, then tried to deny their wrongdoing, and finally they brought terrifying and unscrupulous lawyers to their side of the table to muddy the waters with counteraccusations and vile lies.
But unlike 90% of attorneys out there, I believe Steve truly cares about the Little Guy and he really went to bat for me on a case that I thought was hopeless at times- fighting against a dug-in Goliath with limitless resources. But Steve never quit advocating for me, and in the end we eked out a modest victory.
Even though we achieved merely a moderate settlement that was not necessarily lifechanging money, I couldn't have felt more happy and vindicated (and plan to put that couple thousand G's to good use). While I can't speak for how every case goes, or to the ultimate depths and breadths of his legal acumen, this case here did Steve Teller Law some serious credit... And I can't thank you enough, Steve.
Read more
26 Sep, 2022 by Carlos suarez
I got important information to assess my situation and options
Read more
26 May, 2022 by Desiree gibson
Stephen Teller has literally saved me $80,000. I have had to consult with him on two separate occasions throughout the past 20 years, and armed with his direction and advice, I was able to come out of two different situations with the resolution that I desired, and my bonus in-hand. I highly recommend him and his staff, and could not be happier with the dealings that I've had with his firm.
Read more
30 Sep, 2020 by Nigel
I worked with Rich in 2016 when I went through a divorce, and I would highly recommend him. He was attentive to my case when it needed to be prioritized, and he was knowledgeable throughout the process. While we only made it to mediation, I would have been confident working with Rich had we gone to trial.
Read more
28 Jan, 2016 by Meichele
I initially met with Richard for a free consultation. It was clear from the start that he had the knowledge and experience necessary to handle my case. My case was very complicated, involving a modification of a parenting plan with the children residing in another state. Richard took the time to listen to the facts of my case and answered all of my questions. Just as important, he never tried to oversell me or waste my time/money. I would highly recommend this attorney
Read more
20 Feb, 2015 by Michael
Mr Cassady is an extremely good attorney. I was in a bad situation financially and he really helped me to understand my options, course of actions and what was important when converting my separation into a final divorce decree. We hit many bumps in the road and he was on top of all of them and kept me informed on a regular basis. He worked diligently to map out and get the best outcome possible. The divorce is final now and the future ahead is not cloudy any more thanks to his efforts.
Read more
11 Aug, 2023 by Anonymous
Melissa handed over confidential medical records to the opposing party "by accident", and failed to provide even a basic defense for a protection order, that should have been trivial to contest.
Read more
19 Feb, 2023 by Anonymous
She mostly doesn’t reply emails or doesn’t care her clients’ questions. When she replied my email, she did not know the relevant context enough…
She is unprofessional and mostly unprepared.
Read more
18 Jan, 2023 by Alec
Melissa defended me in a protection order hearing from my neighbors (which was based purely upon well documented, easily proven lies). Despite being out of the country and despite not having practiced law in Pierce Co. Courts, Melissa took on the case. The court granted not one, but TWO extensions so that Melissa could adequately prepare for the hearing.
My husband and I had multiple meetings with Melissa; each one it seemed like it was the first time Melissa had heard of the case, despite that she had been working on it for a month. I regularly had to repeat things we had already discussed multiple times and remind Melissa of things she had already asked about. Additionally, Melissa would regularly say "I don't know about X, I'll have to look into that...", but she never seemed to look into it.
During the trial, Melissa's performance was abysmal. She pretty much did absolutely nothing. When the opposing counsel blatantly misquoted what I had said (accusing me of threatening to murder my neighbor), it was ME who called an objection. The judge told me to mute my mic, and Melissa allowed the opposing counsel to proceed with misquoting me, despite that both parties had submitted video evidence to the contrary. Additionally, she failed to bring up any of our evidence/points such as the damage the neighbors have caused to our property (which they admitted doing to police, record of which was evidence), multiple false reports against us to the fire department, etc. Doing nothing was typical of Melissa though--my husband and I did 100% of the leg work for this case; submitting evidence (which I don't think Melissa fully reviewed), filing papers, etc.
During the hearing, it was revealed that Melissa had received a bunch of evidence from the opposing counsel per the rules of discovery. Melissa failed to notice these in her email and as such, none of us saw that evidence until during the actual hearing. This wasn't much of a surprise, as Melissa had failed to notice emails from me, despite that she was expecting them.
Ultimately, we lost the hearing. And with it we lost our right to bear arms.
After the hearing, Melissa--once again--said she was going to look into things that she didn't know and follow up with us, such as our right to bear arms. We also planned to proceed with a civil suit against our neighbors as they have continually damaged our property among other things. It has now been almost two months since our trial and Melissa has failed to follow up with us as she said she would.
On top of everything, to add insult to injury, Melissa's suggestion at the onset was that we just move.
Overall, I would have to say Melissa's behavior was just shy of completely incompetent. She was extremely unprepared, didn't know how Pierce Co Courts work, dropped the ball repeatedly, and has ultimately ghosted us. We have decided to move forward with other counsel, and I would not recommend Melissa to anyone under any circumstances based purely upon her performance (or lack thereof).
Read more
15 Mar, 2018 by C. and
Melanie helped me through a really difficult legal matter. She stayed in close communication and allocated enough time to get it resolved in my favor. I appreciate her professionalism and her sheer grit. She did what was necessary to take care of it and didn't overcharge. I really appreciate her honesty.
Read more
11 Jul, 2017 by Matthew
I hired Melanie under recommendation from a friend and then was warned by that friend that she was screwing him out of return of money that was paid for a retainer and suggested I do not hire her. He is currently filing a bar complaint and had her contacted by another attorney to get some money back. I HAD ALREADY SIGNED AN AGREEMENT SO WAS STUCK. She literally did nothing she promised, took no action or gace no advise on home, did not follow through on any ideas or promises based on initial consultation and then 8 months in sends me a letter she quits due to the fact she will be out of town for a personal issue - asked her for court dates and nay info pertaining my divorce status to be sent to me and she said look at your old emails to find anything - SHE SHOULD NOT BE WORKING AS AN ATTORNEY - You expect an attorney to guide you through process and suggest what to do throughout - DO NOT HIRE THIS LADY SHE IS A SHAM
Read more
06 Dec, 2013 by Anonymous
Nice to talk to on the phone but shoves you aside when she's busy. I've been waiting a while for her to help. Nice lady but seemed to busy to work my case. Why didn't she communicate in a reasonable time ? I don't know.
She claims that she responds to requests promptly? This can't be further from the truth. There were multiple times that she did not bother to return my calls and was unapologetic for her procrastination. She was also acting like a counselor and telling me how i should handle my oldest son and how I should talk to him. She rambled on like she is some counselor or physiologist. I found this inappropriate and disturbing. I felt like she is not personable whatsoever and is quick to denounce her own faults and blame me as potential client when posting a negative review.
Read more
17 Jun, 2024 by Donna
My mother passed away on October 6, 2022. In her will she willed me her gold Canadian coin as an inheritance item (among other items). When I drove there to pick up my inheritance coin I mentioned to Terry (my brother) that it wasn’t there, there were no British items of my mother’s (Maryann told me she had removed them from my parents’ house), and both JJ’s coins and diamond ring were not there. Terry then pointed to my parents’ bedroom where Maryann Baker and Irene Coyle were sleeping and had been illegally sleeping in my parents’ bed. I picked up the items that were there and then I left the house. A monetary inheritance of $500,000 has already been distributed to both Maryann Baker and Terry Sifford over a year ago, I still do not have my inherited Canadian gold coin and Attorney Grenely refuses to give me my portion unless I approve Maryann Baker’s personal expenses. Mr. Grenely suggested that I drive to Canada to replace my inheritance coin. I want the Canadian coin my mother left for ME.
I requested my Canadian gold coin sent to me through certified mail and as of today, June 14, 2024, I still have not received any of my inheritance.
Read more
19 Jan, 2024 by Gurn blanstein
I have never dealt with an attorney or law firm that was as great as this law firm is. Henry Grenley Is the best attorney I've ever dealt with in my life. He's made my life so much easier getting through the process of dealing with my mother's estate. Not to mention they're very reasonable on the rates. I can't say enough good about Henry. It's always a pleasure every time I meet with him. If I could give 10 stars I would!
Read more
17 Jan, 2024 by John andrews
03 Oct, 2020 by Anonymous
Anne Gould is dishonest and did not have my best interests at heart, nor did she care about my children. She created mess after mess and was angry. She told me too much about her personal life that had fallen apart. She is very unprofessional, did not get critical information on the record and failed my family. I can't believe anyone would give her five stars. Anne let opposing counsel have his way and ruined my life without any remorse. She shouldn't be allowed to practice law. I recommend that you choose other counsel.
Read more
04 Mar, 2020 by Anonymous
Frankly, if you think "divorce lawyer", RUN AWAY from this one. She has been a complete waste of my time and my money. I mean literally... after spending about $20,000 and countless hours doing exactly what she wanted me to do and filling all the documents, I ended up with a commissioner sentence that was exactly the opposite of what we were looking for, and it sided 100% (Yes! let me insist ONE HUNDRED PERCENT) with my spouse. Without investing on her and therefore saving lots of money and time, I could have not gotten less.
To add to that already dismal feeling, she has an attitude, kind of condescending and cold, which I thought naively could have been a plus in the trial.
Read more
12 May, 2018 by Beth
I would love to give Anne a 10 star rating. Unfortunately I can only go to five. I've only needed her services once and she was a rock star. Anne fought for me and always had my best interests in mind. She is very smart, fair, helpful, kind, and honest. The dissolution of my marriage was settled through mediation (she avoided the ridiculously expensive court costs) and the result was very fair and the best outcome for the circumstances. If I ever choose to marry again I’m definitely having Anne write my pre-nip!
Anyone who is going through it knows that divorce is absolutely draining. It drains time, money and energy. Anne kept it from draining my soul. She's awesome.
Read more
06 Aug, 2009 by Anonymous
Catherine stepped in to help me when my previous lawyer quit just two months before trial. She was principally responsible for the excellent result I obtained at trial and I uneqivocably recommend her.
Read more
18 Jul, 2009 by Anonymous
She is not a very good public speaker and really was little help. She contiually said, "You probably won't win that." I don't think I was asking for unreasonable things. She would use the fact that I didn't have much money and tell me that would end up costing me more. I paid her $10,000 for something I could almost do myself. I am now searching for another attorney as my ex is taking me back to court less than one year later.
Read more
29 Apr, 2009 by Anonymous
I had a lot of trouble with her giving me one answer and then a completely different answer at a later date for the same information. She "completely forgot" one part of the proceedings, and poorly worded documents which has caused years of confusion and court hearings to straighten out.
Read more
09 Nov, 2023 by Nona yerbusinez
My experience with this guy is terrible, he will cost you a fortune, drag things out to charge more, not keep track of specific billing, provide inaccurate billing, inaccurate documents, which my attorney had to edit costing additional funds and fail to represent you and your family. He was used by our family in an estate resolution mediation issue and was bias, arrogant and unwilling to communicate or answer questions with any knowledge or integrity which ended up dragging out the process through court. He basically "earned" an exceptionally large portion of my child's inheritance from her father's passing and left us with much less than we were owed by her father's estate and left us feeling robbed. I do not recommend.
Read more
30 Jan, 2023 by John king
Scammer, stay away from this 🐀
Read more
26 Dec, 2022 by Robsg13
I selected him to be my divorce attorney. He was in place for 9 months and charged me almost 9k. Although the said he was filing paperwork and sending it off he did nothing. He’s a snake and will not represent you but he will charge you. He never even replied to any of the paperwork that I put together to send off. Do not hire him it will be a waist of time and resources
Read more
29 Sep, 2024 by Anonymous
He missed several deadlines which cost me literally thousands of dollars. He charged me to file a motion to fix his mistake, which was denied, and charged me for that too. He talks a good game, but at the end of the day, doesn't care. He charged me so much to try to fix his mistake that I had to make two payments on the bill, so he charged me interest on the second half, for work he would have never had to do if he hadn't missed the deadline. He should be reimbursing me the thousands of dollars extra I had to pay my ex because he blew the deadline, not charging me for trying to fix his mistake, which he didn't fix.
Read more
20 Nov, 2021 by Anonymous
Mr. Bennet was hired to represent our family in a very complicated international child-custody/domestic abuse situation. At the beginning, he jumped right in and wrote a very impressive brief. However, as time went on, he lost interest in the case, often siting he had other clients, and did not prepare at all for the mediation and the trial. He often did not respond for weeks when it was time sensitive issue, and let us down big time in his court presentation. It was too late for us to find another lawyer after the mediation and before the trial. I would not recommend his services at all.
Read more
21 Oct, 2020 by Mike
Robert was tasked to file a motion for contempt as my counsel and failed to file properly, then after mores charges paid, failed to file properly yet again, you be the judge!
Read more
25 Apr, 2024 by Allen lowery
There the bést añd tóók my case with no money down ór àny payments uñtil we wiñ wiçh they hàve çontacted Dódge experts to testify and everything very prompt and get down to all the right facs there's no way can loose when the other gúys don't have the éxperts
Read more
15 Mar, 2024 by Andrew williams
27 Oct, 2023 by Lexi poborsky
03 Jun, 2021 by Anonymous
I wish we would have read the review above before ever working with Carl Edwards.
We also endured several delays in Carls responses. The length of time Carl took to rule on our matters made his rulings "stale" to a judge who also refused to use any of Carl's language/ruling in the order.
Carl shouldn't represent family law cases. His actions have already put my child in jeopardy on several occasions because of his inability to read materials and separate himself from his own personal and political issues when ruling. His Rulings will not protect you, as they won't be confirmed in court.
DO NOT HIRE Carl Edwards
Read more
26 Oct, 2018 by Shannon
Carl Edwards came highly recommended. After reviewing a complicated case after 38 years of marriage, he assured me he would be my advocate and stand up to my husband-something I was never able to do. He acknowledged that he would get a forensic accountant and handle my husbands outrageous spending as "predistributions". He shared that he chose few cases because his family would always be a priority.
Unfortunately Carl was never my advocate, never stood up to my husband's lies, refused to get a forensic accountant, undermined my credibility, was sidetracked with personal issues and an enormous case load, proved that he had no understanding of commercial real estate or residential real estate, and was clueless about domestic abuse...
Eventually I had to fight both my husband and Carl over the value of my commercial building (Carl had never obtained an appraisal over the 2 years prior to final arbitration). My settlement doubled because of my persistence.
Carl had so many personal issues during my case, it would be reasonable for him to acknowledge this and be accountable. He has not.
Read more
20 Aug, 2008 by Anonymous
Carl is a really good lawyer. Attentive to his clients, attentive to detail, reasonably well organized, and very honest about the law, and the law's up's and down's. he won't guarantee you that you'll win your case with empty promises, but you get the impression from him and working with him that he'll do everything he can within the law that is fair and reasonable and doesn't promote animosity, to win. Carl doesn't believe in destroying your opponent with slander, but rather standing by the facts and the law and with good common sense to get the job done. People in divorces will often give themselves enough rope to hang themselves with, Carl sees to it ya don't do anything stupid.
Read more
12 Dec, 2018 by Leif madsen
i was referred to Kerry Richards by a friend who also had a great experience. Kerry Richards is a saint. saved me and my son. i owe to him all the little moments i get to experience as i watch my son grow everyday. we finalized everything almost three years ago and writing this still brings tears to my eyes. there is nothing more important than family, and i wouldnt trust mine with anyone else.
Read more
15 Aug, 2018 by Rob fulwell
09 Feb, 2015 by Lori sherman
Do not use Joel Bradshaw to be the lawyer for a irrevocable trust. The trustee would not give an accounting or bank statements and receipts to the beneficiaries, which is required by law, and Joel Bradshaw defended the trustee instead of the beneficiaries. He must not have informed the trustee of the law. The law requires the trustee to look out for the best interest of the beneficiaries not use the trust money in whatever way they please. Mr. Bradshaw also told beneficiaries the trustee could not produce the bank statements because they were in "storage". I guess he never heard of "online banking".
Read more
Find Your Lawyer
By Practice Area
-
Business
-
Litigation
-
Real Estate
-
Intellectual Property
-
Personal Injury
-
Government
-
Criminal Defense
-
Civil Rights
-
Estate Planning
-
Appeals
-
Family Law
-
Consumer Protection
-
Insurance
-
Tax
-
Immigration
-
Medical Malpractice
-
Probate
-
Class Action
-
Car Accident
-
Child Support
-
Lawsuit / Dispute
-
Entertainment
-
Workers Compensation
-
Wrongful Death
-
Child Custody
-
Mediation
-
Elder Law
-
Trusts
-
Domestic Violence
-
Juvenile Law
-
Social Security & Disability
-
Financial Markets And Services
-
Debt Collection
-
Discrimination
-
Bankruptcy
-
Foreclosure
-
Wrongful Termination
-
Sexual Harassment
-
Adoption
-
Copyright Application
-
Sex Crime
-
Debt Settlement
-
Divorce
-
Federal Crime
-
Cannabis Law
-
Employment / Labor
-
Construction
-
Credit Repair
-
Life Insurance
-
Admiralty / Maritime
-
Drug Crime
-
Contracts
-
Education Law
Discover the ideal lawyer
You can search a lawyer by practice area, lawyer name, city, state, or ZIP code
FAQs
Questions? We have answers
Top Questions to Ask a Lawyer
When meeting with a lawyer for the first time, it's important to ask the right questions to understand their expertise and determine if they're the right fit for your legal needs. Here are some top questions to consider:
-
What experience do you have with cases similar to mine?
Ensure the lawyer has relevant experience in the specific area of law pertaining to your case. -
How do you charge for your services, and what are the estimated costs?
Understand the fee structure, including hourly rates, flat fees, retainer fees, and any additional expenses. -
What potential outcomes can I expect from my case?
While no lawyer can guarantee results, they can provide an assessment of possible scenarios based on their experience. -
What is your approach to handling cases like mine?
Learn about their strategy, whether they prefer negotiation, mediation, or litigation. -
Who will be working on my case?
Find out if the lawyer will handle your case personally or delegate tasks to other attorneys or paralegals. -
How will you communicate with me throughout the process?
Establish expectations for updates, preferred communication methods, and response times. -
What is the likely timeline for resolving my case?
Get an estimate of how long the process may take from start to finish. -
Do you have references from past clients?
Testimonials or references can provide insight into the lawyer's professionalism and effectiveness. -
What are the strengths and weaknesses of my case?
Understanding potential challenges helps you prepare and sets realistic expectations. -
Are there alternative ways to solve my legal problem?
Discuss options like mediation, arbitration, or settlement to resolve the issue efficiently.
How to Check the Credibility of a Lawyer
Before hiring a lawyer, it's crucial to verify their credibility and ensure they're qualified to handle your case:
-
Verify Their License:
Check with your state's bar association to confirm the lawyer is licensed and in good standing. -
Experience and Specialization:
Ensure the lawyer specializes in the area of law relevant to your case. -
Disciplinary Record:
Look up any history of disciplinary actions or complaints through the state bar association. -
Client Reviews and Testimonials:
Read reviews on legal directories like Avvo, Martindale-Hubbell, or Google to gauge client satisfaction. -
Professional Memberships:
Membership in professional organizations or specialty bar associations can indicate a commitment to their field. -
Awards and Recognitions:
Honors from reputable organizations reflect expertise and a positive reputation. -
Consultation Assessment:
Use the initial consultation to evaluate their communication skills, responsiveness, and willingness to address your concerns. -
Ask for References:
A credible lawyer should be willing to provide references from past clients.
What Should I Prepare for My First Consultation?
To make the most of your initial meeting with a lawyer, come prepared with:
-
Relevant Documents:
Bring all documents related to your case, such as contracts, correspondence, legal notices, court papers, or evidence. -
Written Summary:
Prepare a concise written summary of your situation, including key dates, events, and involved parties. -
List of Questions:
Write down any questions you have about your case, the legal process, or the lawyer's experience. -
Financial Information:
If applicable, bring financial documents like pay stubs, tax returns, or bank statements. -
Contact Information:
Provide details of any witnesses or other parties relevant to your case. -
Personal Identification:
Bring a valid ID for verification purposes. -
Pen and Notebook:
Take notes during the consultation to remember important points. -
Budget Constraints:
Be ready to discuss your budget and any financial limitations.
How Much Does a Lawyer Cost?
The cost of hiring a lawyer varies widely based on several factors:
-
Fee Structures:
-
Hourly Rate:
Lawyers may charge anywhere from $150 to $500 or more per hour, depending on experience and location. -
Flat Fee:
For routine legal services like drafting a will or handling an uncontested divorce, lawyers might offer a flat fee. -
Retainer Fee:
An upfront payment against which the lawyer bills hourly fees. -
Contingency Fee:
Common in personal injury cases; the lawyer receives a percentage (typically 25% to 40%) of any settlement or award. -
Monthly Retainer:
For ongoing services, businesses might pay a monthly fee for a set number of hours or services.
-
Hourly Rate:
-
Factors Affecting Cost:
-
Complexity of the Case:
More complex cases require more time and resources, increasing costs. -
Lawyer's Experience:
Highly experienced lawyers may charge higher fees. -
Geographic Location:
Legal fees can vary significantly by region or city. -
Additional Expenses:
Court filing fees, expert witness fees, travel expenses, and administrative costs may be extra.
-
Complexity of the Case:
-
Estimating Total Costs:
Request a detailed fee agreement outlining all potential costs.
Discuss any additional expenses that may arise during the case. -
Negotiating Fees:
Some lawyers may be willing to negotiate fees or offer payment plans, especially for clients with financial constraints. -
Pro Bono Services:
For those who cannot afford legal services, some lawyers or legal aid organizations offer services at reduced rates or for free.
