Marshall came to my home many times mostly on his bike He is very nice, to the point. Get's things done for his clients, (us) in our case. Marshall went way over the top in our expectations, a true expert in law. If you need a lawyer if you have been wronged, this is the man you want!! Period!

After working for a very large corporation for over 21 years, I was wrongfully given notice to terminate my employment. I connected up with Marshall who reviewed my case and he felt confident he could help me out. We consulted and then he got to work contacting the appropriate representatives from my company. Although the lawyers on the other side continually “dragged their feet”, Marshall was persistent. In the end I received a very fair judgment. His advice and guidance during that very difficult time in my life was truly appreciated. He helped navigate me through some very rough water and I came out of it in a much better place than where I started.

Some time ago Mr. Tanick handled an employment matter for me with the University of Minnesota. I thought he handled the matter quite well and was conscientious and easy to stay in touch with. If you look into Mr. Tanick's background and experience you will find someone who is well respected in his field. He also has a reputation in labor and employment law that is helpful in dealing with such matters. Especially at an institution such as the University of Minnesota. It is great to have a lawyer like Marshall "in your corner."

After I was terminated from my job of twenty years, he helped me get unemployment from an administrative hearing, then helped me get $9,000 sick pay my employer had refused to pay. He used mediation to reach a settlement that ended up covering my legal fees and then some. Without him, I'd have been in a very bad place.

Being an 'expert' in libel law we had a brief conversation about hiring him for the possibility of suing someone for slander. At that time he was courteous, friendly and appeared to actually want to help. My main concern was statue of limitations, a few lawyers told for FREE that my case was past the statue of limitations. Mr Tanick told me there was a clause that could extend the statute and to give him $500 so he could research the case and see if it applied. During the almost EIGHT MONTHS i waited for his determination i would call him periodically, literally maybe once a month to ask the status. Each and every call not only he wouldn't tell me the status of his research but i was repeatedly scolded and belittled for calling him and asking what the status was. I was not to call him. It was as if i was speaking to a different person. And that i was a child who was in need of reprimanding. He sent me many copies of legal opinions he had written for Law Journals but nothing regarding our case. EIGHT MONTHS after paying him the $500 'research fee' i was mailed a letter stating that the statue of limitations had expired. No mention of the legal clause he assured me was a possibility of extending the statute of limitations, nothing more than a statement saying, I cant help you, the limitations had expired 2 years ago, which i knew already, have a nice day, any other services required please 'call'. This lawyer is a sham. He is a cheat. He is a phony. He is two faced. For $10,000 i wouldn't refer him to anyone for any legal matter. He had acted in such bad faith that this is the first ever review i have written, i am 36. Nothing in his letter mentioned how he attempted to clear my name, attempted to show his work regarding the clause he 'researched' for, nothing that would show his work. Nothing to provide my family that i tried to clear our name or to the family court judge that i was trying to clear my name due to this matter affecting my parenting time decisions the judge was making.

I came to Marshall about issues involving tips and a tax penalty both caused by my employer. He called me twice in about two and a half months after the consultation. The first, five weeks after the consultation he called me to tell me about a similar case with another company that ended in favor of the employee, the same case I told him about in the consultation that made me think I might have a case. The second time he called me while I was at work and I told him I could talk for 2 minutes, then he and a lawyer friend of his spent 35 minutes trying to set up a conference call with me so he could ask me two questions that I had already answered and wrote down for him at the initial consultation. When his lawyer friend asked me if I worked for tips and I said yes Marshall responded "Oh, I didn't know that.". A couple weeks later he sent me a letter saying he wouldn't take the case.

Mr. Tanick accepted my case, cashed my checks, then did nothing for me. I NEEDED someone to REPRESENT ME in an unemployment insurance claim and while the opposition was grilling and killing me during my telephoned hearing, Mr. Tanick was reading papers for what I assume was another case, eating nuts, and oh yeah...standing out in the hallway. My hearing lasted for a couple of days and he did no fighting whatsoever for me.

Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility – Complaint form: Complaint: As stated by Mr. Tanick, he consented to “contacting the newspaper editor with a view of trying to obtain a retraction, correction, or other clarification regarding the false attribution to you of the “disruptive,” “dysfunctional” quotation, which you never made about the local Republican party, and related matters.” Our initial consultation was on September 24, 2010. As if this date (September 2011), only a draft letter has been written by Mr. Tanick. Nothing further has been billed to my account since as he states in his e-mail dated 10-4-2010: “You have paid a $350 consultation fee, which we appreciate, along with a $750 advance payment, which should be credited to this matter.” By not acting in a timely manner, my reputation continues to be unfairly blemished. Complaint is in process of adjudication by the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility as of September 2011. Mr. Tanick stated in his letter dated April 27, 2011 that "As I wrote to you previously, I did not 'tie up the loose ends' by following up with the Editor." Mr. Tanick's attorney for this matter stated in May 2011 that all moneys would be refunded if I would terminate my Counciliation Court claim which I did. I have waited nearly three months after the "check had been cut" to receive my promised refund. It appears that Mr. Tanick will not follow through with his promised resolution of my claim. I have refiled my Councilation Court claim after no action by Mr. Tanick nor his attorney to settle ths matter.

We got connected with Mr. Tanick through his online business inquiry, and he reviewed our case, then called us by saying "I will take your case", and then provided to us his thinking of what he would do with the case. The next day, we were in his MPLS office for one hour, we did not learn anything about our case and his advices within that hour, but instead, we learned and obtained 20 pages of his previous OPINION and newspaper publications, of cause, we have to pay him the LAWYER fee. Before we left, we gave him additional pages of case related documents we wanted him to review, and he said he would do it in his spare times. The following day, we called him again and hoped that by then he would be finished his reading and would generated some good ideas about how to proceed with the case, but to our great surprise, he said he did not take any paper from us, he was busy and needed to go. After that we never heard anything from him any more. Lawyers are hungry for cases, some charges you for the first time interview, some don't. In this case, Mr. Tanick lured customer by saying "I will take you case", then take the money, run away fast without doing anything significant to us, made us fully understand what 'Ripple Off" means, especially to someone who just lost job and faced financial difficulty. Mr. Tanick seriously violated his professional code of conduct, and need to be condemned by his bad behave. Really shamed of you!

Marshall came to my home many times mostly on his bike He is very nice, to the point. Get's things done for his clients, (us) in our case. Marshall went way over the top in our expectations, a true expert in law. If you need a lawyer if you have been wronged, this is the man you want!! Period!

After working for a very large corporation for over 21 years, I was wrongfully given notice to terminate my employment. I connected up with Marshall who reviewed my case and he felt confident he could help me out. We consulted and then he got to work contacting the appropriate representatives from my company. Although the lawyers on the other side continually “dragged their feet”, Marshall was persistent. In the end I received a very fair judgment. His advice and guidance during that very difficult time in my life was truly appreciated. He helped navigate me through some very rough water and I came out of it in a much better place than where I started.

Some time ago Mr. Tanick handled an employment matter for me with the University of Minnesota. I thought he handled the matter quite well and was conscientious and easy to stay in touch with. If you look into Mr. Tanick's background and experience you will find someone who is well respected in his field. He also has a reputation in labor and employment law that is helpful in dealing with such matters. Especially at an institution such as the University of Minnesota. It is great to have a lawyer like Marshall "in your corner."

After I was terminated from my job of twenty years, he helped me get unemployment from an administrative hearing, then helped me get $9,000 sick pay my employer had refused to pay. He used mediation to reach a settlement that ended up covering my legal fees and then some. Without him, I'd have been in a very bad place.

Being an 'expert' in libel law we had a brief conversation about hiring him for the possibility of suing someone for slander. At that time he was courteous, friendly and appeared to actually want to help. My main concern was statue of limitations, a few lawyers told for FREE that my case was past the statue of limitations. Mr Tanick told me there was a clause that could extend the statute and to give him $500 so he could research the case and see if it applied. During the almost EIGHT MONTHS i waited for his determination i would call him periodically, literally maybe once a month to ask the status. Each and every call not only he wouldn't tell me the status of his research but i was repeatedly scolded and belittled for calling him and asking what the status was. I was not to call him. It was as if i was speaking to a different person. And that i was a child who was in need of reprimanding. He sent me many copies of legal opinions he had written for Law Journals but nothing regarding our case. EIGHT MONTHS after paying him the $500 'research fee' i was mailed a letter stating that the statue of limitations had expired. No mention of the legal clause he assured me was a possibility of extending the statute of limitations, nothing more than a statement saying, I cant help you, the limitations had expired 2 years ago, which i knew already, have a nice day, any other services required please 'call'. This lawyer is a sham. He is a cheat. He is a phony. He is two faced. For $10,000 i wouldn't refer him to anyone for any legal matter. He had acted in such bad faith that this is the first ever review i have written, i am 36. Nothing in his letter mentioned how he attempted to clear my name, attempted to show his work regarding the clause he 'researched' for, nothing that would show his work. Nothing to provide my family that i tried to clear our name or to the family court judge that i was trying to clear my name due to this matter affecting my parenting time decisions the judge was making.

I came to Marshall about issues involving tips and a tax penalty both caused by my employer. He called me twice in about two and a half months after the consultation. The first, five weeks after the consultation he called me to tell me about a similar case with another company that ended in favor of the employee, the same case I told him about in the consultation that made me think I might have a case. The second time he called me while I was at work and I told him I could talk for 2 minutes, then he and a lawyer friend of his spent 35 minutes trying to set up a conference call with me so he could ask me two questions that I had already answered and wrote down for him at the initial consultation. When his lawyer friend asked me if I worked for tips and I said yes Marshall responded "Oh, I didn't know that.". A couple weeks later he sent me a letter saying he wouldn't take the case.

Mr. Tanick accepted my case, cashed my checks, then did nothing for me. I NEEDED someone to REPRESENT ME in an unemployment insurance claim and while the opposition was grilling and killing me during my telephoned hearing, Mr. Tanick was reading papers for what I assume was another case, eating nuts, and oh yeah...standing out in the hallway. My hearing lasted for a couple of days and he did no fighting whatsoever for me.

Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility – Complaint form: Complaint: As stated by Mr. Tanick, he consented to “contacting the newspaper editor with a view of trying to obtain a retraction, correction, or other clarification regarding the false attribution to you of the “disruptive,” “dysfunctional” quotation, which you never made about the local Republican party, and related matters.” Our initial consultation was on September 24, 2010. As if this date (September 2011), only a draft letter has been written by Mr. Tanick. Nothing further has been billed to my account since as he states in his e-mail dated 10-4-2010: “You have paid a $350 consultation fee, which we appreciate, along with a $750 advance payment, which should be credited to this matter.” By not acting in a timely manner, my reputation continues to be unfairly blemished. Complaint is in process of adjudication by the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility as of September 2011. Mr. Tanick stated in his letter dated April 27, 2011 that "As I wrote to you previously, I did not 'tie up the loose ends' by following up with the Editor." Mr. Tanick's attorney for this matter stated in May 2011 that all moneys would be refunded if I would terminate my Counciliation Court claim which I did. I have waited nearly three months after the "check had been cut" to receive my promised refund. It appears that Mr. Tanick will not follow through with his promised resolution of my claim. I have refiled my Councilation Court claim after no action by Mr. Tanick nor his attorney to settle ths matter.

We got connected with Mr. Tanick through his online business inquiry, and he reviewed our case, then called us by saying "I will take your case", and then provided to us his thinking of what he would do with the case. The next day, we were in his MPLS office for one hour, we did not learn anything about our case and his advices within that hour, but instead, we learned and obtained 20 pages of his previous OPINION and newspaper publications, of cause, we have to pay him the LAWYER fee. Before we left, we gave him additional pages of case related documents we wanted him to review, and he said he would do it in his spare times. The following day, we called him again and hoped that by then he would be finished his reading and would generated some good ideas about how to proceed with the case, but to our great surprise, he said he did not take any paper from us, he was busy and needed to go. After that we never heard anything from him any more. Lawyers are hungry for cases, some charges you for the first time interview, some don't. In this case, Mr. Tanick lured customer by saying "I will take you case", then take the money, run away fast without doing anything significant to us, made us fully understand what 'Ripple Off" means, especially to someone who just lost job and faced financial difficulty. Mr. Tanick seriously violated his professional code of conduct, and need to be condemned by his bad behave. Really shamed of you!

Marshall came to my home many times mostly on his bike He is very nice, to the point. Get's things done for his clients, (us) in our case. Marshall went way over the top in our expectations, a true expert in law. If you need a lawyer if you have been wronged, this is the man you want!! Period!

After working for a very large corporation for over 21 years, I was wrongfully given notice to terminate my employment. I connected up with Marshall who reviewed my case and he felt confident he could help me out. We consulted and then he got to work contacting the appropriate representatives from my company. Although the lawyers on the other side continually “dragged their feet”, Marshall was persistent. In the end I received a very fair judgment. His advice and guidance during that very difficult time in my life was truly appreciated. He helped navigate me through some very rough water and I came out of it in a much better place than where I started.

Some time ago Mr. Tanick handled an employment matter for me with the University of Minnesota. I thought he handled the matter quite well and was conscientious and easy to stay in touch with. If you look into Mr. Tanick's background and experience you will find someone who is well respected in his field. He also has a reputation in labor and employment law that is helpful in dealing with such matters. Especially at an institution such as the University of Minnesota. It is great to have a lawyer like Marshall "in your corner."

After I was terminated from my job of twenty years, he helped me get unemployment from an administrative hearing, then helped me get $9,000 sick pay my employer had refused to pay. He used mediation to reach a settlement that ended up covering my legal fees and then some. Without him, I'd have been in a very bad place.

Being an 'expert' in libel law we had a brief conversation about hiring him for the possibility of suing someone for slander. At that time he was courteous, friendly and appeared to actually want to help. My main concern was statue of limitations, a few lawyers told for FREE that my case was past the statue of limitations. Mr Tanick told me there was a clause that could extend the statute and to give him $500 so he could research the case and see if it applied. During the almost EIGHT MONTHS i waited for his determination i would call him periodically, literally maybe once a month to ask the status. Each and every call not only he wouldn't tell me the status of his research but i was repeatedly scolded and belittled for calling him and asking what the status was. I was not to call him. It was as if i was speaking to a different person. And that i was a child who was in need of reprimanding. He sent me many copies of legal opinions he had written for Law Journals but nothing regarding our case. EIGHT MONTHS after paying him the $500 'research fee' i was mailed a letter stating that the statue of limitations had expired. No mention of the legal clause he assured me was a possibility of extending the statute of limitations, nothing more than a statement saying, I cant help you, the limitations had expired 2 years ago, which i knew already, have a nice day, any other services required please 'call'. This lawyer is a sham. He is a cheat. He is a phony. He is two faced. For $10,000 i wouldn't refer him to anyone for any legal matter. He had acted in such bad faith that this is the first ever review i have written, i am 36. Nothing in his letter mentioned how he attempted to clear my name, attempted to show his work regarding the clause he 'researched' for, nothing that would show his work. Nothing to provide my family that i tried to clear our name or to the family court judge that i was trying to clear my name due to this matter affecting my parenting time decisions the judge was making.

I came to Marshall about issues involving tips and a tax penalty both caused by my employer. He called me twice in about two and a half months after the consultation. The first, five weeks after the consultation he called me to tell me about a similar case with another company that ended in favor of the employee, the same case I told him about in the consultation that made me think I might have a case. The second time he called me while I was at work and I told him I could talk for 2 minutes, then he and a lawyer friend of his spent 35 minutes trying to set up a conference call with me so he could ask me two questions that I had already answered and wrote down for him at the initial consultation. When his lawyer friend asked me if I worked for tips and I said yes Marshall responded "Oh, I didn't know that.". A couple weeks later he sent me a letter saying he wouldn't take the case.

Mr. Tanick accepted my case, cashed my checks, then did nothing for me. I NEEDED someone to REPRESENT ME in an unemployment insurance claim and while the opposition was grilling and killing me during my telephoned hearing, Mr. Tanick was reading papers for what I assume was another case, eating nuts, and oh yeah...standing out in the hallway. My hearing lasted for a couple of days and he did no fighting whatsoever for me.

Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility – Complaint form: Complaint: As stated by Mr. Tanick, he consented to “contacting the newspaper editor with a view of trying to obtain a retraction, correction, or other clarification regarding the false attribution to you of the “disruptive,” “dysfunctional” quotation, which you never made about the local Republican party, and related matters.” Our initial consultation was on September 24, 2010. As if this date (September 2011), only a draft letter has been written by Mr. Tanick. Nothing further has been billed to my account since as he states in his e-mail dated 10-4-2010: “You have paid a $350 consultation fee, which we appreciate, along with a $750 advance payment, which should be credited to this matter.” By not acting in a timely manner, my reputation continues to be unfairly blemished. Complaint is in process of adjudication by the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility as of September 2011. Mr. Tanick stated in his letter dated April 27, 2011 that "As I wrote to you previously, I did not 'tie up the loose ends' by following up with the Editor." Mr. Tanick's attorney for this matter stated in May 2011 that all moneys would be refunded if I would terminate my Counciliation Court claim which I did. I have waited nearly three months after the "check had been cut" to receive my promised refund. It appears that Mr. Tanick will not follow through with his promised resolution of my claim. I have refiled my Councilation Court claim after no action by Mr. Tanick nor his attorney to settle ths matter.

We got connected with Mr. Tanick through his online business inquiry, and he reviewed our case, then called us by saying "I will take your case", and then provided to us his thinking of what he would do with the case. The next day, we were in his MPLS office for one hour, we did not learn anything about our case and his advices within that hour, but instead, we learned and obtained 20 pages of his previous OPINION and newspaper publications, of cause, we have to pay him the LAWYER fee. Before we left, we gave him additional pages of case related documents we wanted him to review, and he said he would do it in his spare times. The following day, we called him again and hoped that by then he would be finished his reading and would generated some good ideas about how to proceed with the case, but to our great surprise, he said he did not take any paper from us, he was busy and needed to go. After that we never heard anything from him any more. Lawyers are hungry for cases, some charges you for the first time interview, some don't. In this case, Mr. Tanick lured customer by saying "I will take you case", then take the money, run away fast without doing anything significant to us, made us fully understand what 'Ripple Off" means, especially to someone who just lost job and faced financial difficulty. Mr. Tanick seriously violated his professional code of conduct, and need to be condemned by his bad behave. Really shamed of you!