I was disappointed with his representation on an estate/probate matter in which I am a named heir, and the executor has been non-responsive to both myself and a different local attorney (opposing counsel). At the beginning, Mr. Reid was engaging and seemed to understand my goals and objectives, which were simple- to present myself to the courts as a named heir, and to compel the executor to take action after more than two years of inactivity. His engaging nature changed at the time that I returned my fee agreement and paid the retainer. He had already started the meter running before I signed the fee agreement. I asked him for clarification on a line item on his first monthly statement- where he admitted a billing error. He then told me that he was terminating his representation, citing that I had communicated with the opposing attorney. I do admit to communicating with opposing counsel, which was to provide supporting documentation on an estate which has been languishing due to the inactivity of the executor. Mr. Reid was copied on these documents and correspondence. He terminated his representation via e-mail. Not once did he advise me to avoid or cease communication with the attorney representing the estate. Not once did he call me to provide me with any updates of any kind. I received only three communications from him following the receipt of the retainer. One was to acknowledge the retainer. Two was a monthly statement- which was in his own admission, incorrect. Third was an e-mail terminating his representation. His communication style can only be classified as non-existent. I will be requesting the return of my entire retainer.

I was disappointed with his representation on an estate/probate matter in which I am a named heir, and the executor has been non-responsive to both myself and a different local attorney (opposing counsel). At the beginning, Mr. Reid was engaging and seemed to understand my goals and objectives, which were simple- to present myself to the courts as a named heir, and to compel the executor to take action after more than two years of inactivity. His engaging nature changed at the time that I returned my fee agreement and paid the retainer. He had already started the meter running before I signed the fee agreement. I asked him for clarification on a line item on his first monthly statement- where he admitted a billing error. He then told me that he was terminating his representation, citing that I had communicated with the opposing attorney. I do admit to communicating with opposing counsel, which was to provide supporting documentation on an estate which has been languishing due to the inactivity of the executor. Mr. Reid was copied on these documents and correspondence. He terminated his representation via e-mail. Not once did he advise me to avoid or cease communication with the attorney representing the estate. Not once did he call me to provide me with any updates of any kind. I received only three communications from him following the receipt of the retainer. One was to acknowledge the retainer. Two was a monthly statement- which was in his own admission, incorrect. Third was an e-mail terminating his representation. His communication style can only be classified as non-existent. I will be requesting the return of my entire retainer.

I was disappointed with his representation on an estate/probate matter in which I am a named heir, and the executor has been non-responsive to both myself and a different local attorney (opposing counsel). At the beginning, Mr. Reid was engaging and seemed to understand my goals and objectives, which were simple- to present myself to the courts as a named heir, and to compel the executor to take action after more than two years of inactivity. His engaging nature changed at the time that I returned my fee agreement and paid the retainer. He had already started the meter running before I signed the fee agreement. I asked him for clarification on a line item on his first monthly statement- where he admitted a billing error. He then told me that he was terminating his representation, citing that I had communicated with the opposing attorney. I do admit to communicating with opposing counsel, which was to provide supporting documentation on an estate which has been languishing due to the inactivity of the executor. Mr. Reid was copied on these documents and correspondence. He terminated his representation via e-mail. Not once did he advise me to avoid or cease communication with the attorney representing the estate. Not once did he call me to provide me with any updates of any kind. I received only three communications from him following the receipt of the retainer. One was to acknowledge the retainer. Two was a monthly statement- which was in his own admission, incorrect. Third was an e-mail terminating his representation. His communication style can only be classified as non-existent. I will be requesting the return of my entire retainer.