Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.

 Although I feel this attorney provided less than adequate service in my case, my main reason for submitting this review is to warn the public of his unscrupulous and unethical behavior. This attorney does not honor the contract that he signs. In my opinion, his contract is misleading, fraudulent, and dishonorable. The contract clearly states (and I am quoting here) “in the unlikely event of a disagreement as to our bills, or your payment of them, both you and this firm agree to submit any such controversy to binding arbitration in accordance with the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program set out in California Business and Professions Code Section 6200, et seq. You and this firm agree that the arbitrator’s award as to any such dispute shall constitute a binding money judgment between you and this firm, and the prevailing party will have all of the collection rights and privileges of a judgment creditor in accordance with California law.” I did have a disagreement as to his bill; I tried unsuccessfully to negotiate with him, and I did take him to the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program TWICE. I won a substantial award each time, from two different panels. The problem is that Mr. Crowley would not agree to BINDING Arbitration either time. His rational was that because we were in the Santa Clara County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program and not the California State Bar Fee Arbitration Program, he did not have to honor the contract that he signed when I hired him to represent me. Of course, when he signed the contract, he knew the legal loophole he built into the contract. I didn’t. If a County Bar Association, such as a Santa Clara County Bar Association, has a Fee Arbitration Program, then the California State Bar Association defers to them. Because Mr. Crowley’s contract states the State Bar Fee Arbitration Program must be used, and we were using the County Bar Association Fee Arbitration Program, his contract wasn’t binding. He perpetrated this charade even further, by sending me a letter stating (again I am quoting) “It is surely your right to arbitrate the attorney’s fee charged you in this matter. You should contact the Santa Clara County Bar Association and request arbitration of this matter.” I would not have pursued fee arbitration which cost $1200 each time, or spent an additional $30,000 for an attorney to represent me in the Superior Court challenges Mr. Crowley used to avoid paying the substantial judgment awarded to me by the two arbitration panels. Do not go anywhere near this man for help with your legal problems. I regret that I ever heard of him.