I am a retired FBI Agent who is a licensed bonded private investigator in California. Joseph Salazar was retained for me by the Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District (SMFD) where I was named in a lawsuit against them as a separate individual. SMFD voted in a Fire District Board meeting to offer me representation in the matter. Salazar represented both SMFD, and me. SMFD was empowered to withdraw their representation of me if I was found to be at fault or to have acted unethically. They never made that finding, nor withdrew their offer. Salazar, without any notice to me, or SMFD decided on his own that he would seek to have the entire matter forced onto my professional liability insurance. He provided a letter to me announcing his representation, and interviewed me as his client. Upon discovery of documents three years later, I discovered that Salazar, without anyone's knowledge, met with me, after he had announced his intention to "dump" the entire case onto my insurance carrier to seek my confidential information. After receiving the information he acted to turn the case over to my carrier. He failed. Instead my carrier picked up my representation only, and eventually Salazar represented the SMFD as they settled the case for a large amount of money. I did not settle and the plaintiff eventually abandoned their case. I learned with my discovery of documents that Salazar did not include in my file that was transferred to my new attorney his actions where he announced his intent to not represent me, before meeting with me. I sued Salazar and he prevailed based on the courts finding that I waited too long to take action. At issue was that Salazar had hidden his acts but whether I should have known of the harm when it occurred. According to the courts the victim is responsible to know when someone has acted against them, even before they can prove it. Nevertheless, it is my opinion and belief, for which I have documentation that Salazar is deceitful, unethical and represents based on the financial position of the client. Salazar, even after not representing me, took it upon himself to negatively affect my business by causing SMFD to delay my invoices for three years. Ironically the amount of time needed to exceed the statute. In my opinion Salazar in his legal capacity works for his own benefit which is usually the benefit of the insurance company to insure continued retention.

I am a retired FBI Agent who is a licensed bonded private investigator in California. Joseph Salazar was retained for me by the Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District (SMFD) where I was named in a lawsuit against them as a separate individual. SMFD voted in a Fire District Board meeting to offer me representation in the matter. Salazar represented both SMFD, and me. SMFD was empowered to withdraw their representation of me if I was found to be at fault or to have acted unethically. They never made that finding, nor withdrew their offer. Salazar, without any notice to me, or SMFD decided on his own that he would seek to have the entire matter forced onto my professional liability insurance. He provided a letter to me announcing his representation, and interviewed me as his client. Upon discovery of documents three years later, I discovered that Salazar, without anyone's knowledge, met with me, after he had announced his intention to "dump" the entire case onto my insurance carrier to seek my confidential information. After receiving the information he acted to turn the case over to my carrier. He failed. Instead my carrier picked up my representation only, and eventually Salazar represented the SMFD as they settled the case for a large amount of money. I did not settle and the plaintiff eventually abandoned their case. I learned with my discovery of documents that Salazar did not include in my file that was transferred to my new attorney his actions where he announced his intent to not represent me, before meeting with me. I sued Salazar and he prevailed based on the courts finding that I waited too long to take action. At issue was that Salazar had hidden his acts but whether I should have known of the harm when it occurred. According to the courts the victim is responsible to know when someone has acted against them, even before they can prove it. Nevertheless, it is my opinion and belief, for which I have documentation that Salazar is deceitful, unethical and represents based on the financial position of the client. Salazar, even after not representing me, took it upon himself to negatively affect my business by causing SMFD to delay my invoices for three years. Ironically the amount of time needed to exceed the statute. In my opinion Salazar in his legal capacity works for his own benefit which is usually the benefit of the insurance company to insure continued retention.