Reviews

Jennifer represented my husband and I , new homeowners, in a multi-party lawsuit brought forth by our home's general contractor, and countered by us. While Jennifer was well versed in the rule of the law, she was not very savvy in the execution of the law. Most glaring, was her failure to find an acceptable solution for the damages caused by the builder, contractor, and architect, that resulted in our house not being built to code, and not being able to pass inspections. The answer that Jennifer and her experts agreed was acceptable, and the absolute best we could hope for, turned out to be wrong, and completely unacceptable by the county, who had jurisdiction over our house. You would think that when you're being charged upwards of $510.00/hr by Jennifer and another partner, who was "consulting" on our case, that they would at least try to get the solution right. After all, Jennifer does promote herself as an expert in the field of "Construction Law". And why is it that experienced lawyers, who are partners, not associates, require such extensive consultation between one another throughout a case? We've since learned that the Bar does not look kindly on this type of billing practice. It has prompted us to seriously consider have an independent legal-billing audit, of Jennifer's invoices, to determine whether or not we were unfairly charged. When we attended our first mediation, which was not successful, Jennifer seemed disconnected and tired. She yawned excessively throughout the day, and seemed to have a difficult time staying awake in the afternoon. Even if the chances of success are slim, I expect my lawyer to be alert and focused during an important, expensive, process. Following Jennifer's lackluster performance during mediation, we really lost confidence. We privately voiced our concerns to a Senior partner and asked if he would be willing to take over the case. He declined and assured us he was confident in Jennifer's ability. With our legal bills reaching over $75,000 and our legitimate concerns having been "swept" under the rug, we felt put off and stressed out. Soon after, and somewhat by chance, we had the opportunity to discuss our situation with a Minneapolis attorney who was retired from private practice. Having no skin in the game, he was able to provide an honest assessment of our case and give advice about how to proceed. From behind the scenes, he helped steer us out of the money pit we were heading down with Jennifer's style of representation. In the end, we requested a settlement conference with the Judge, which Jennifer denied us, as predicted by the retired attorney. Instead, Jennifer insisted on trying to mediate over the phone. After SIX WEEKS, and lots more billable hours for Jennifer, she settled the case. Not surprising, she got the lion's share of the payout and we ended up with a whopping $,7800.00 on a settlement that was valued over $140,000.00, and we still had to fix all of the problems with our house! Imagine our shock when the county informed us that Jennifer's "expert" solution was unacceptable. It's important to note here that we were charged over $17,000.00 in expert-related fees alone, and not once did Jennifer or her "experts" contact the county. In my opinion, the top motivator for Jennifer, when it comes to being a lawyer, is stacking up billable hours. Unfortunately, she seemed more concerned in representing herself, rather than us. She's was more of a rule follower than a fighter, and she often allowed attorney's for the opposing parties to get away with not following the rules. In the end, she was not very savvy. In cases where a homeowner whom, more than any other party in a construction lawsuit, needs a strong advocate, she was not worth her high prices. I only wish I had read the previous poster's review of Jennifer before hiring her. It was absolutely right on.

I couldn't help but notice that my lawyer did not implement any strategy or a plan in order to negotiate the best possible settlement. It is unfortunate that I had to deal with the mediator myself. I was under the impression that the intent was to settle this case regardless of a settlement amount. The day after the mediation my attorney continued insisting on settling, though I was not satisfied with the amount. My lawyer did not show any effort or desire to continue negotiations with the opposing side. I had to be insistent and spent a lot of time in attempts to encourage my attorney to continue negotiations (and of course I was charged for this time). I was not satisfied with the settlement amount I was offered, but I had to take it, because I was not sure anymore that my interest would be adequately represented during the arbitration. Also, I believe that settlement amount could be higher if I had received proper representation during the mediation. I was surprised to see that my bill was not reduced after I had expressed my concerns about the poor representation that I received during the mediation as well as after the mediation.