I hired Mr Larsen to take care of my fathers estate after my farther passed. It should have been an easy job, but when problems kept coming up he took care of them. I appreciate all the hard Mr Lawson had done for me.

I sought the services of Mr. Larsen in response to my husband's unexpected death. Complications regarding my husband's corporation and the absence of a will created a frightening journey for me in the face of unfathomable loss. Mr. Larsen was exceptionally sensitive and patient, explaining everything carefully and providing attention to my concerns in a timely manner. Where choices between actions were necessary, he presented the options in detail and with clarity. I found Mr. Larsen enormously helpful to me in navigating this process, and gladly recommend him without reservation.

I hired Mr. Larsen to complete two tasks: 1) To get questions answered by the attorney who represented a corrupt Fiduciary I was dealing with 2) To review my Trust document and advise me My Larsen failed to get any answers from the attorney, and in fact, notified me that the other attorney did all the talking on my dime, when what I hired Michael to do was to inform the attorney of my dissatisfaction of his client, the corrupt Fiduciary. The main question I needed answered was if the Fiduciary would approve funding for my mother (her client) to be represented by her own attorney. The attorney I asked Michael to approach, whom he happened to know personally, refused to answer that basic question, and Michael did not even confront him about it. I had to point it out to Michael and ask him to send a repeat email to the attorney and point out that he had not answered the question. He did so at my expense. When I hired Michael he said "you need to show them that you mean business", however, he was extremely passive in his role and yielded no beneficial information. The other issue was asking the Fiduciary to remove herself from the Conservatorship. In the end, Michael advised me to have my mother get her own attorney, which is the only way that would be effective in having a Fiduciary step down or be replaced. He should have known that and advised me of it upfront - that I had no real power in the matter. Also, I mentioned to him that I had a very common legal document executed in regards to my mother - another Estate Attorney had accomplished that for me. Michael had no idea what that common legal document was. In regards to my simple Trust, when I asked a basic question about it, (after I paid him for 5 hours time to review it, one other document and one phone call and email with the other attorney) he stated that he would need to be paid for more time to review the Trust again. Ridiculous. The most challenging problem I had with Michael Larsen is that he took every opportunity to instill fear in me, in order to convince me that I needed to give him more paid hours. He said it was his "duty" to inform me of my legal vulnerabilities - which I was already aware of. He tried to convince me that if this or that happened, in the future, that it would be very bad - intimating that I should invest in more money in him to prevent something that may not even ever happen, and not related to the problem at hand that I was dealing with. I also did not appreciate his style of communication with me which I found to be very condescending. He rallied on and on about what the other attorney said and would not let me interrupt and ask questions. I have a large legal problem that I have been dealing with for 1.5 years and have worked with four different attornies over that time and get along just fine with all of them. One attorney, I have worked with exclusively for the 1.5 years to present. This issue I was dealing with was an ailing mother who was being taken advantage of by a corrupt Fiduciary. Ironically, Michael's mother began a demise in the middle of his service to me. it disrupted his ability to respond to me in a timely manner, for which I was very understanding and compassionate. I only wish he would have extended the same care and compassion to my situation with my mother. I was referred to Michael by the Sonoma County Lawyer Referal system. They had previously sent me two very competent attornies whom I have enjoyed working with. Michael is the exception. When you hire an attorney, just know that they can never guarantee any result. They get paid whether you get results or not. My impression of Michael is that he is no longer passionate about his practice, he seemed lackluster and burned out (before the issue with his mother) and I did not get a sense that he cared one way or another about my needs.

I hired Mr Larsen to take care of my fathers estate after my farther passed. It should have been an easy job, but when problems kept coming up he took care of them. I appreciate all the hard Mr Lawson had done for me.

I sought the services of Mr. Larsen in response to my husband's unexpected death. Complications regarding my husband's corporation and the absence of a will created a frightening journey for me in the face of unfathomable loss. Mr. Larsen was exceptionally sensitive and patient, explaining everything carefully and providing attention to my concerns in a timely manner. Where choices between actions were necessary, he presented the options in detail and with clarity. I found Mr. Larsen enormously helpful to me in navigating this process, and gladly recommend him without reservation.

I hired Mr. Larsen to complete two tasks: 1) To get questions answered by the attorney who represented a corrupt Fiduciary I was dealing with 2) To review my Trust document and advise me My Larsen failed to get any answers from the attorney, and in fact, notified me that the other attorney did all the talking on my dime, when what I hired Michael to do was to inform the attorney of my dissatisfaction of his client, the corrupt Fiduciary. The main question I needed answered was if the Fiduciary would approve funding for my mother (her client) to be represented by her own attorney. The attorney I asked Michael to approach, whom he happened to know personally, refused to answer that basic question, and Michael did not even confront him about it. I had to point it out to Michael and ask him to send a repeat email to the attorney and point out that he had not answered the question. He did so at my expense. When I hired Michael he said "you need to show them that you mean business", however, he was extremely passive in his role and yielded no beneficial information. The other issue was asking the Fiduciary to remove herself from the Conservatorship. In the end, Michael advised me to have my mother get her own attorney, which is the only way that would be effective in having a Fiduciary step down or be replaced. He should have known that and advised me of it upfront - that I had no real power in the matter. Also, I mentioned to him that I had a very common legal document executed in regards to my mother - another Estate Attorney had accomplished that for me. Michael had no idea what that common legal document was. In regards to my simple Trust, when I asked a basic question about it, (after I paid him for 5 hours time to review it, one other document and one phone call and email with the other attorney) he stated that he would need to be paid for more time to review the Trust again. Ridiculous. The most challenging problem I had with Michael Larsen is that he took every opportunity to instill fear in me, in order to convince me that I needed to give him more paid hours. He said it was his "duty" to inform me of my legal vulnerabilities - which I was already aware of. He tried to convince me that if this or that happened, in the future, that it would be very bad - intimating that I should invest in more money in him to prevent something that may not even ever happen, and not related to the problem at hand that I was dealing with. I also did not appreciate his style of communication with me which I found to be very condescending. He rallied on and on about what the other attorney said and would not let me interrupt and ask questions. I have a large legal problem that I have been dealing with for 1.5 years and have worked with four different attornies over that time and get along just fine with all of them. One attorney, I have worked with exclusively for the 1.5 years to present. This issue I was dealing with was an ailing mother who was being taken advantage of by a corrupt Fiduciary. Ironically, Michael's mother began a demise in the middle of his service to me. it disrupted his ability to respond to me in a timely manner, for which I was very understanding and compassionate. I only wish he would have extended the same care and compassion to my situation with my mother. I was referred to Michael by the Sonoma County Lawyer Referal system. They had previously sent me two very competent attornies whom I have enjoyed working with. Michael is the exception. When you hire an attorney, just know that they can never guarantee any result. They get paid whether you get results or not. My impression of Michael is that he is no longer passionate about his practice, he seemed lackluster and burned out (before the issue with his mother) and I did not get a sense that he cared one way or another about my needs.

I hired Mr Larsen to take care of my fathers estate after my farther passed. It should have been an easy job, but when problems kept coming up he took care of them. I appreciate all the hard Mr Lawson had done for me.

I sought the services of Mr. Larsen in response to my husband's unexpected death. Complications regarding my husband's corporation and the absence of a will created a frightening journey for me in the face of unfathomable loss. Mr. Larsen was exceptionally sensitive and patient, explaining everything carefully and providing attention to my concerns in a timely manner. Where choices between actions were necessary, he presented the options in detail and with clarity. I found Mr. Larsen enormously helpful to me in navigating this process, and gladly recommend him without reservation.

I hired Mr. Larsen to complete two tasks: 1) To get questions answered by the attorney who represented a corrupt Fiduciary I was dealing with 2) To review my Trust document and advise me My Larsen failed to get any answers from the attorney, and in fact, notified me that the other attorney did all the talking on my dime, when what I hired Michael to do was to inform the attorney of my dissatisfaction of his client, the corrupt Fiduciary. The main question I needed answered was if the Fiduciary would approve funding for my mother (her client) to be represented by her own attorney. The attorney I asked Michael to approach, whom he happened to know personally, refused to answer that basic question, and Michael did not even confront him about it. I had to point it out to Michael and ask him to send a repeat email to the attorney and point out that he had not answered the question. He did so at my expense. When I hired Michael he said "you need to show them that you mean business", however, he was extremely passive in his role and yielded no beneficial information. The other issue was asking the Fiduciary to remove herself from the Conservatorship. In the end, Michael advised me to have my mother get her own attorney, which is the only way that would be effective in having a Fiduciary step down or be replaced. He should have known that and advised me of it upfront - that I had no real power in the matter. Also, I mentioned to him that I had a very common legal document executed in regards to my mother - another Estate Attorney had accomplished that for me. Michael had no idea what that common legal document was. In regards to my simple Trust, when I asked a basic question about it, (after I paid him for 5 hours time to review it, one other document and one phone call and email with the other attorney) he stated that he would need to be paid for more time to review the Trust again. Ridiculous. The most challenging problem I had with Michael Larsen is that he took every opportunity to instill fear in me, in order to convince me that I needed to give him more paid hours. He said it was his "duty" to inform me of my legal vulnerabilities - which I was already aware of. He tried to convince me that if this or that happened, in the future, that it would be very bad - intimating that I should invest in more money in him to prevent something that may not even ever happen, and not related to the problem at hand that I was dealing with. I also did not appreciate his style of communication with me which I found to be very condescending. He rallied on and on about what the other attorney said and would not let me interrupt and ask questions. I have a large legal problem that I have been dealing with for 1.5 years and have worked with four different attornies over that time and get along just fine with all of them. One attorney, I have worked with exclusively for the 1.5 years to present. This issue I was dealing with was an ailing mother who was being taken advantage of by a corrupt Fiduciary. Ironically, Michael's mother began a demise in the middle of his service to me. it disrupted his ability to respond to me in a timely manner, for which I was very understanding and compassionate. I only wish he would have extended the same care and compassion to my situation with my mother. I was referred to Michael by the Sonoma County Lawyer Referal system. They had previously sent me two very competent attornies whom I have enjoyed working with. Michael is the exception. When you hire an attorney, just know that they can never guarantee any result. They get paid whether you get results or not. My impression of Michael is that he is no longer passionate about his practice, he seemed lackluster and burned out (before the issue with his mother) and I did not get a sense that he cared one way or another about my needs.

I hired Mr Larsen to take care of my fathers estate after my farther passed. It should have been an easy job, but when problems kept coming up he took care of them. I appreciate all the hard Mr Lawson had done for me.

I sought the services of Mr. Larsen in response to my husband's unexpected death. Complications regarding my husband's corporation and the absence of a will created a frightening journey for me in the face of unfathomable loss. Mr. Larsen was exceptionally sensitive and patient, explaining everything carefully and providing attention to my concerns in a timely manner. Where choices between actions were necessary, he presented the options in detail and with clarity. I found Mr. Larsen enormously helpful to me in navigating this process, and gladly recommend him without reservation.

I hired Mr. Larsen to complete two tasks: 1) To get questions answered by the attorney who represented a corrupt Fiduciary I was dealing with 2) To review my Trust document and advise me My Larsen failed to get any answers from the attorney, and in fact, notified me that the other attorney did all the talking on my dime, when what I hired Michael to do was to inform the attorney of my dissatisfaction of his client, the corrupt Fiduciary. The main question I needed answered was if the Fiduciary would approve funding for my mother (her client) to be represented by her own attorney. The attorney I asked Michael to approach, whom he happened to know personally, refused to answer that basic question, and Michael did not even confront him about it. I had to point it out to Michael and ask him to send a repeat email to the attorney and point out that he had not answered the question. He did so at my expense. When I hired Michael he said "you need to show them that you mean business", however, he was extremely passive in his role and yielded no beneficial information. The other issue was asking the Fiduciary to remove herself from the Conservatorship. In the end, Michael advised me to have my mother get her own attorney, which is the only way that would be effective in having a Fiduciary step down or be replaced. He should have known that and advised me of it upfront - that I had no real power in the matter. Also, I mentioned to him that I had a very common legal document executed in regards to my mother - another Estate Attorney had accomplished that for me. Michael had no idea what that common legal document was. In regards to my simple Trust, when I asked a basic question about it, (after I paid him for 5 hours time to review it, one other document and one phone call and email with the other attorney) he stated that he would need to be paid for more time to review the Trust again. Ridiculous. The most challenging problem I had with Michael Larsen is that he took every opportunity to instill fear in me, in order to convince me that I needed to give him more paid hours. He said it was his "duty" to inform me of my legal vulnerabilities - which I was already aware of. He tried to convince me that if this or that happened, in the future, that it would be very bad - intimating that I should invest in more money in him to prevent something that may not even ever happen, and not related to the problem at hand that I was dealing with. I also did not appreciate his style of communication with me which I found to be very condescending. He rallied on and on about what the other attorney said and would not let me interrupt and ask questions. I have a large legal problem that I have been dealing with for 1.5 years and have worked with four different attornies over that time and get along just fine with all of them. One attorney, I have worked with exclusively for the 1.5 years to present. This issue I was dealing with was an ailing mother who was being taken advantage of by a corrupt Fiduciary. Ironically, Michael's mother began a demise in the middle of his service to me. it disrupted his ability to respond to me in a timely manner, for which I was very understanding and compassionate. I only wish he would have extended the same care and compassion to my situation with my mother. I was referred to Michael by the Sonoma County Lawyer Referal system. They had previously sent me two very competent attornies whom I have enjoyed working with. Michael is the exception. When you hire an attorney, just know that they can never guarantee any result. They get paid whether you get results or not. My impression of Michael is that he is no longer passionate about his practice, he seemed lackluster and burned out (before the issue with his mother) and I did not get a sense that he cared one way or another about my needs.

I hired Mr Larsen to take care of my fathers estate after my farther passed. It should have been an easy job, but when problems kept coming up he took care of them. I appreciate all the hard Mr Lawson had done for me.

I sought the services of Mr. Larsen in response to my husband's unexpected death. Complications regarding my husband's corporation and the absence of a will created a frightening journey for me in the face of unfathomable loss. Mr. Larsen was exceptionally sensitive and patient, explaining everything carefully and providing attention to my concerns in a timely manner. Where choices between actions were necessary, he presented the options in detail and with clarity. I found Mr. Larsen enormously helpful to me in navigating this process, and gladly recommend him without reservation.

I hired Mr. Larsen to complete two tasks: 1) To get questions answered by the attorney who represented a corrupt Fiduciary I was dealing with 2) To review my Trust document and advise me My Larsen failed to get any answers from the attorney, and in fact, notified me that the other attorney did all the talking on my dime, when what I hired Michael to do was to inform the attorney of my dissatisfaction of his client, the corrupt Fiduciary. The main question I needed answered was if the Fiduciary would approve funding for my mother (her client) to be represented by her own attorney. The attorney I asked Michael to approach, whom he happened to know personally, refused to answer that basic question, and Michael did not even confront him about it. I had to point it out to Michael and ask him to send a repeat email to the attorney and point out that he had not answered the question. He did so at my expense. When I hired Michael he said "you need to show them that you mean business", however, he was extremely passive in his role and yielded no beneficial information. The other issue was asking the Fiduciary to remove herself from the Conservatorship. In the end, Michael advised me to have my mother get her own attorney, which is the only way that would be effective in having a Fiduciary step down or be replaced. He should have known that and advised me of it upfront - that I had no real power in the matter. Also, I mentioned to him that I had a very common legal document executed in regards to my mother - another Estate Attorney had accomplished that for me. Michael had no idea what that common legal document was. In regards to my simple Trust, when I asked a basic question about it, (after I paid him for 5 hours time to review it, one other document and one phone call and email with the other attorney) he stated that he would need to be paid for more time to review the Trust again. Ridiculous. The most challenging problem I had with Michael Larsen is that he took every opportunity to instill fear in me, in order to convince me that I needed to give him more paid hours. He said it was his "duty" to inform me of my legal vulnerabilities - which I was already aware of. He tried to convince me that if this or that happened, in the future, that it would be very bad - intimating that I should invest in more money in him to prevent something that may not even ever happen, and not related to the problem at hand that I was dealing with. I also did not appreciate his style of communication with me which I found to be very condescending. He rallied on and on about what the other attorney said and would not let me interrupt and ask questions. I have a large legal problem that I have been dealing with for 1.5 years and have worked with four different attornies over that time and get along just fine with all of them. One attorney, I have worked with exclusively for the 1.5 years to present. This issue I was dealing with was an ailing mother who was being taken advantage of by a corrupt Fiduciary. Ironically, Michael's mother began a demise in the middle of his service to me. it disrupted his ability to respond to me in a timely manner, for which I was very understanding and compassionate. I only wish he would have extended the same care and compassion to my situation with my mother. I was referred to Michael by the Sonoma County Lawyer Referal system. They had previously sent me two very competent attornies whom I have enjoyed working with. Michael is the exception. When you hire an attorney, just know that they can never guarantee any result. They get paid whether you get results or not. My impression of Michael is that he is no longer passionate about his practice, he seemed lackluster and burned out (before the issue with his mother) and I did not get a sense that he cared one way or another about my needs.

I hired Mr Larsen to take care of my fathers estate after my farther passed. It should have been an easy job, but when problems kept coming up he took care of them. I appreciate all the hard Mr Lawson had done for me.

I sought the services of Mr. Larsen in response to my husband's unexpected death. Complications regarding my husband's corporation and the absence of a will created a frightening journey for me in the face of unfathomable loss. Mr. Larsen was exceptionally sensitive and patient, explaining everything carefully and providing attention to my concerns in a timely manner. Where choices between actions were necessary, he presented the options in detail and with clarity. I found Mr. Larsen enormously helpful to me in navigating this process, and gladly recommend him without reservation.

I hired Mr. Larsen to complete two tasks: 1) To get questions answered by the attorney who represented a corrupt Fiduciary I was dealing with 2) To review my Trust document and advise me My Larsen failed to get any answers from the attorney, and in fact, notified me that the other attorney did all the talking on my dime, when what I hired Michael to do was to inform the attorney of my dissatisfaction of his client, the corrupt Fiduciary. The main question I needed answered was if the Fiduciary would approve funding for my mother (her client) to be represented by her own attorney. The attorney I asked Michael to approach, whom he happened to know personally, refused to answer that basic question, and Michael did not even confront him about it. I had to point it out to Michael and ask him to send a repeat email to the attorney and point out that he had not answered the question. He did so at my expense. When I hired Michael he said "you need to show them that you mean business", however, he was extremely passive in his role and yielded no beneficial information. The other issue was asking the Fiduciary to remove herself from the Conservatorship. In the end, Michael advised me to have my mother get her own attorney, which is the only way that would be effective in having a Fiduciary step down or be replaced. He should have known that and advised me of it upfront - that I had no real power in the matter. Also, I mentioned to him that I had a very common legal document executed in regards to my mother - another Estate Attorney had accomplished that for me. Michael had no idea what that common legal document was. In regards to my simple Trust, when I asked a basic question about it, (after I paid him for 5 hours time to review it, one other document and one phone call and email with the other attorney) he stated that he would need to be paid for more time to review the Trust again. Ridiculous. The most challenging problem I had with Michael Larsen is that he took every opportunity to instill fear in me, in order to convince me that I needed to give him more paid hours. He said it was his "duty" to inform me of my legal vulnerabilities - which I was already aware of. He tried to convince me that if this or that happened, in the future, that it would be very bad - intimating that I should invest in more money in him to prevent something that may not even ever happen, and not related to the problem at hand that I was dealing with. I also did not appreciate his style of communication with me which I found to be very condescending. He rallied on and on about what the other attorney said and would not let me interrupt and ask questions. I have a large legal problem that I have been dealing with for 1.5 years and have worked with four different attornies over that time and get along just fine with all of them. One attorney, I have worked with exclusively for the 1.5 years to present. This issue I was dealing with was an ailing mother who was being taken advantage of by a corrupt Fiduciary. Ironically, Michael's mother began a demise in the middle of his service to me. it disrupted his ability to respond to me in a timely manner, for which I was very understanding and compassionate. I only wish he would have extended the same care and compassion to my situation with my mother. I was referred to Michael by the Sonoma County Lawyer Referal system. They had previously sent me two very competent attornies whom I have enjoyed working with. Michael is the exception. When you hire an attorney, just know that they can never guarantee any result. They get paid whether you get results or not. My impression of Michael is that he is no longer passionate about his practice, he seemed lackluster and burned out (before the issue with his mother) and I did not get a sense that he cared one way or another about my needs.

I hired Mr Larsen to take care of my fathers estate after my farther passed. It should have been an easy job, but when problems kept coming up he took care of them. I appreciate all the hard Mr Lawson had done for me.

I sought the services of Mr. Larsen in response to my husband's unexpected death. Complications regarding my husband's corporation and the absence of a will created a frightening journey for me in the face of unfathomable loss. Mr. Larsen was exceptionally sensitive and patient, explaining everything carefully and providing attention to my concerns in a timely manner. Where choices between actions were necessary, he presented the options in detail and with clarity. I found Mr. Larsen enormously helpful to me in navigating this process, and gladly recommend him without reservation.

I hired Mr. Larsen to complete two tasks: 1) To get questions answered by the attorney who represented a corrupt Fiduciary I was dealing with 2) To review my Trust document and advise me My Larsen failed to get any answers from the attorney, and in fact, notified me that the other attorney did all the talking on my dime, when what I hired Michael to do was to inform the attorney of my dissatisfaction of his client, the corrupt Fiduciary. The main question I needed answered was if the Fiduciary would approve funding for my mother (her client) to be represented by her own attorney. The attorney I asked Michael to approach, whom he happened to know personally, refused to answer that basic question, and Michael did not even confront him about it. I had to point it out to Michael and ask him to send a repeat email to the attorney and point out that he had not answered the question. He did so at my expense. When I hired Michael he said "you need to show them that you mean business", however, he was extremely passive in his role and yielded no beneficial information. The other issue was asking the Fiduciary to remove herself from the Conservatorship. In the end, Michael advised me to have my mother get her own attorney, which is the only way that would be effective in having a Fiduciary step down or be replaced. He should have known that and advised me of it upfront - that I had no real power in the matter. Also, I mentioned to him that I had a very common legal document executed in regards to my mother - another Estate Attorney had accomplished that for me. Michael had no idea what that common legal document was. In regards to my simple Trust, when I asked a basic question about it, (after I paid him for 5 hours time to review it, one other document and one phone call and email with the other attorney) he stated that he would need to be paid for more time to review the Trust again. Ridiculous. The most challenging problem I had with Michael Larsen is that he took every opportunity to instill fear in me, in order to convince me that I needed to give him more paid hours. He said it was his "duty" to inform me of my legal vulnerabilities - which I was already aware of. He tried to convince me that if this or that happened, in the future, that it would be very bad - intimating that I should invest in more money in him to prevent something that may not even ever happen, and not related to the problem at hand that I was dealing with. I also did not appreciate his style of communication with me which I found to be very condescending. He rallied on and on about what the other attorney said and would not let me interrupt and ask questions. I have a large legal problem that I have been dealing with for 1.5 years and have worked with four different attornies over that time and get along just fine with all of them. One attorney, I have worked with exclusively for the 1.5 years to present. This issue I was dealing with was an ailing mother who was being taken advantage of by a corrupt Fiduciary. Ironically, Michael's mother began a demise in the middle of his service to me. it disrupted his ability to respond to me in a timely manner, for which I was very understanding and compassionate. I only wish he would have extended the same care and compassion to my situation with my mother. I was referred to Michael by the Sonoma County Lawyer Referal system. They had previously sent me two very competent attornies whom I have enjoyed working with. Michael is the exception. When you hire an attorney, just know that they can never guarantee any result. They get paid whether you get results or not. My impression of Michael is that he is no longer passionate about his practice, he seemed lackluster and burned out (before the issue with his mother) and I did not get a sense that he cared one way or another about my needs.

I hired Mr Larsen to take care of my fathers estate after my farther passed. It should have been an easy job, but when problems kept coming up he took care of them. I appreciate all the hard Mr Lawson had done for me.

I sought the services of Mr. Larsen in response to my husband's unexpected death. Complications regarding my husband's corporation and the absence of a will created a frightening journey for me in the face of unfathomable loss. Mr. Larsen was exceptionally sensitive and patient, explaining everything carefully and providing attention to my concerns in a timely manner. Where choices between actions were necessary, he presented the options in detail and with clarity. I found Mr. Larsen enormously helpful to me in navigating this process, and gladly recommend him without reservation.

I hired Mr. Larsen to complete two tasks: 1) To get questions answered by the attorney who represented a corrupt Fiduciary I was dealing with 2) To review my Trust document and advise me My Larsen failed to get any answers from the attorney, and in fact, notified me that the other attorney did all the talking on my dime, when what I hired Michael to do was to inform the attorney of my dissatisfaction of his client, the corrupt Fiduciary. The main question I needed answered was if the Fiduciary would approve funding for my mother (her client) to be represented by her own attorney. The attorney I asked Michael to approach, whom he happened to know personally, refused to answer that basic question, and Michael did not even confront him about it. I had to point it out to Michael and ask him to send a repeat email to the attorney and point out that he had not answered the question. He did so at my expense. When I hired Michael he said "you need to show them that you mean business", however, he was extremely passive in his role and yielded no beneficial information. The other issue was asking the Fiduciary to remove herself from the Conservatorship. In the end, Michael advised me to have my mother get her own attorney, which is the only way that would be effective in having a Fiduciary step down or be replaced. He should have known that and advised me of it upfront - that I had no real power in the matter. Also, I mentioned to him that I had a very common legal document executed in regards to my mother - another Estate Attorney had accomplished that for me. Michael had no idea what that common legal document was. In regards to my simple Trust, when I asked a basic question about it, (after I paid him for 5 hours time to review it, one other document and one phone call and email with the other attorney) he stated that he would need to be paid for more time to review the Trust again. Ridiculous. The most challenging problem I had with Michael Larsen is that he took every opportunity to instill fear in me, in order to convince me that I needed to give him more paid hours. He said it was his "duty" to inform me of my legal vulnerabilities - which I was already aware of. He tried to convince me that if this or that happened, in the future, that it would be very bad - intimating that I should invest in more money in him to prevent something that may not even ever happen, and not related to the problem at hand that I was dealing with. I also did not appreciate his style of communication with me which I found to be very condescending. He rallied on and on about what the other attorney said and would not let me interrupt and ask questions. I have a large legal problem that I have been dealing with for 1.5 years and have worked with four different attornies over that time and get along just fine with all of them. One attorney, I have worked with exclusively for the 1.5 years to present. This issue I was dealing with was an ailing mother who was being taken advantage of by a corrupt Fiduciary. Ironically, Michael's mother began a demise in the middle of his service to me. it disrupted his ability to respond to me in a timely manner, for which I was very understanding and compassionate. I only wish he would have extended the same care and compassion to my situation with my mother. I was referred to Michael by the Sonoma County Lawyer Referal system. They had previously sent me two very competent attornies whom I have enjoyed working with. Michael is the exception. When you hire an attorney, just know that they can never guarantee any result. They get paid whether you get results or not. My impression of Michael is that he is no longer passionate about his practice, he seemed lackluster and burned out (before the issue with his mother) and I did not get a sense that he cared one way or another about my needs.

I hired Mr Larsen to take care of my fathers estate after my farther passed. It should have been an easy job, but when problems kept coming up he took care of them. I appreciate all the hard Mr Lawson had done for me.

I sought the services of Mr. Larsen in response to my husband's unexpected death. Complications regarding my husband's corporation and the absence of a will created a frightening journey for me in the face of unfathomable loss. Mr. Larsen was exceptionally sensitive and patient, explaining everything carefully and providing attention to my concerns in a timely manner. Where choices between actions were necessary, he presented the options in detail and with clarity. I found Mr. Larsen enormously helpful to me in navigating this process, and gladly recommend him without reservation.

I hired Mr. Larsen to complete two tasks: 1) To get questions answered by the attorney who represented a corrupt Fiduciary I was dealing with 2) To review my Trust document and advise me My Larsen failed to get any answers from the attorney, and in fact, notified me that the other attorney did all the talking on my dime, when what I hired Michael to do was to inform the attorney of my dissatisfaction of his client, the corrupt Fiduciary. The main question I needed answered was if the Fiduciary would approve funding for my mother (her client) to be represented by her own attorney. The attorney I asked Michael to approach, whom he happened to know personally, refused to answer that basic question, and Michael did not even confront him about it. I had to point it out to Michael and ask him to send a repeat email to the attorney and point out that he had not answered the question. He did so at my expense. When I hired Michael he said "you need to show them that you mean business", however, he was extremely passive in his role and yielded no beneficial information. The other issue was asking the Fiduciary to remove herself from the Conservatorship. In the end, Michael advised me to have my mother get her own attorney, which is the only way that would be effective in having a Fiduciary step down or be replaced. He should have known that and advised me of it upfront - that I had no real power in the matter. Also, I mentioned to him that I had a very common legal document executed in regards to my mother - another Estate Attorney had accomplished that for me. Michael had no idea what that common legal document was. In regards to my simple Trust, when I asked a basic question about it, (after I paid him for 5 hours time to review it, one other document and one phone call and email with the other attorney) he stated that he would need to be paid for more time to review the Trust again. Ridiculous. The most challenging problem I had with Michael Larsen is that he took every opportunity to instill fear in me, in order to convince me that I needed to give him more paid hours. He said it was his "duty" to inform me of my legal vulnerabilities - which I was already aware of. He tried to convince me that if this or that happened, in the future, that it would be very bad - intimating that I should invest in more money in him to prevent something that may not even ever happen, and not related to the problem at hand that I was dealing with. I also did not appreciate his style of communication with me which I found to be very condescending. He rallied on and on about what the other attorney said and would not let me interrupt and ask questions. I have a large legal problem that I have been dealing with for 1.5 years and have worked with four different attornies over that time and get along just fine with all of them. One attorney, I have worked with exclusively for the 1.5 years to present. This issue I was dealing with was an ailing mother who was being taken advantage of by a corrupt Fiduciary. Ironically, Michael's mother began a demise in the middle of his service to me. it disrupted his ability to respond to me in a timely manner, for which I was very understanding and compassionate. I only wish he would have extended the same care and compassion to my situation with my mother. I was referred to Michael by the Sonoma County Lawyer Referal system. They had previously sent me two very competent attornies whom I have enjoyed working with. Michael is the exception. When you hire an attorney, just know that they can never guarantee any result. They get paid whether you get results or not. My impression of Michael is that he is no longer passionate about his practice, he seemed lackluster and burned out (before the issue with his mother) and I did not get a sense that he cared one way or another about my needs.

I hired Mr Larsen to take care of my fathers estate after my farther passed. It should have been an easy job, but when problems kept coming up he took care of them. I appreciate all the hard Mr Lawson had done for me.

I sought the services of Mr. Larsen in response to my husband's unexpected death. Complications regarding my husband's corporation and the absence of a will created a frightening journey for me in the face of unfathomable loss. Mr. Larsen was exceptionally sensitive and patient, explaining everything carefully and providing attention to my concerns in a timely manner. Where choices between actions were necessary, he presented the options in detail and with clarity. I found Mr. Larsen enormously helpful to me in navigating this process, and gladly recommend him without reservation.

I hired Mr. Larsen to complete two tasks: 1) To get questions answered by the attorney who represented a corrupt Fiduciary I was dealing with 2) To review my Trust document and advise me My Larsen failed to get any answers from the attorney, and in fact, notified me that the other attorney did all the talking on my dime, when what I hired Michael to do was to inform the attorney of my dissatisfaction of his client, the corrupt Fiduciary. The main question I needed answered was if the Fiduciary would approve funding for my mother (her client) to be represented by her own attorney. The attorney I asked Michael to approach, whom he happened to know personally, refused to answer that basic question, and Michael did not even confront him about it. I had to point it out to Michael and ask him to send a repeat email to the attorney and point out that he had not answered the question. He did so at my expense. When I hired Michael he said "you need to show them that you mean business", however, he was extremely passive in his role and yielded no beneficial information. The other issue was asking the Fiduciary to remove herself from the Conservatorship. In the end, Michael advised me to have my mother get her own attorney, which is the only way that would be effective in having a Fiduciary step down or be replaced. He should have known that and advised me of it upfront - that I had no real power in the matter. Also, I mentioned to him that I had a very common legal document executed in regards to my mother - another Estate Attorney had accomplished that for me. Michael had no idea what that common legal document was. In regards to my simple Trust, when I asked a basic question about it, (after I paid him for 5 hours time to review it, one other document and one phone call and email with the other attorney) he stated that he would need to be paid for more time to review the Trust again. Ridiculous. The most challenging problem I had with Michael Larsen is that he took every opportunity to instill fear in me, in order to convince me that I needed to give him more paid hours. He said it was his "duty" to inform me of my legal vulnerabilities - which I was already aware of. He tried to convince me that if this or that happened, in the future, that it would be very bad - intimating that I should invest in more money in him to prevent something that may not even ever happen, and not related to the problem at hand that I was dealing with. I also did not appreciate his style of communication with me which I found to be very condescending. He rallied on and on about what the other attorney said and would not let me interrupt and ask questions. I have a large legal problem that I have been dealing with for 1.5 years and have worked with four different attornies over that time and get along just fine with all of them. One attorney, I have worked with exclusively for the 1.5 years to present. This issue I was dealing with was an ailing mother who was being taken advantage of by a corrupt Fiduciary. Ironically, Michael's mother began a demise in the middle of his service to me. it disrupted his ability to respond to me in a timely manner, for which I was very understanding and compassionate. I only wish he would have extended the same care and compassion to my situation with my mother. I was referred to Michael by the Sonoma County Lawyer Referal system. They had previously sent me two very competent attornies whom I have enjoyed working with. Michael is the exception. When you hire an attorney, just know that they can never guarantee any result. They get paid whether you get results or not. My impression of Michael is that he is no longer passionate about his practice, he seemed lackluster and burned out (before the issue with his mother) and I did not get a sense that he cared one way or another about my needs.

I hired Mr Larsen to take care of my fathers estate after my farther passed. It should have been an easy job, but when problems kept coming up he took care of them. I appreciate all the hard Mr Lawson had done for me.

I sought the services of Mr. Larsen in response to my husband's unexpected death. Complications regarding my husband's corporation and the absence of a will created a frightening journey for me in the face of unfathomable loss. Mr. Larsen was exceptionally sensitive and patient, explaining everything carefully and providing attention to my concerns in a timely manner. Where choices between actions were necessary, he presented the options in detail and with clarity. I found Mr. Larsen enormously helpful to me in navigating this process, and gladly recommend him without reservation.

I hired Mr. Larsen to complete two tasks: 1) To get questions answered by the attorney who represented a corrupt Fiduciary I was dealing with 2) To review my Trust document and advise me My Larsen failed to get any answers from the attorney, and in fact, notified me that the other attorney did all the talking on my dime, when what I hired Michael to do was to inform the attorney of my dissatisfaction of his client, the corrupt Fiduciary. The main question I needed answered was if the Fiduciary would approve funding for my mother (her client) to be represented by her own attorney. The attorney I asked Michael to approach, whom he happened to know personally, refused to answer that basic question, and Michael did not even confront him about it. I had to point it out to Michael and ask him to send a repeat email to the attorney and point out that he had not answered the question. He did so at my expense. When I hired Michael he said "you need to show them that you mean business", however, he was extremely passive in his role and yielded no beneficial information. The other issue was asking the Fiduciary to remove herself from the Conservatorship. In the end, Michael advised me to have my mother get her own attorney, which is the only way that would be effective in having a Fiduciary step down or be replaced. He should have known that and advised me of it upfront - that I had no real power in the matter. Also, I mentioned to him that I had a very common legal document executed in regards to my mother - another Estate Attorney had accomplished that for me. Michael had no idea what that common legal document was. In regards to my simple Trust, when I asked a basic question about it, (after I paid him for 5 hours time to review it, one other document and one phone call and email with the other attorney) he stated that he would need to be paid for more time to review the Trust again. Ridiculous. The most challenging problem I had with Michael Larsen is that he took every opportunity to instill fear in me, in order to convince me that I needed to give him more paid hours. He said it was his "duty" to inform me of my legal vulnerabilities - which I was already aware of. He tried to convince me that if this or that happened, in the future, that it would be very bad - intimating that I should invest in more money in him to prevent something that may not even ever happen, and not related to the problem at hand that I was dealing with. I also did not appreciate his style of communication with me which I found to be very condescending. He rallied on and on about what the other attorney said and would not let me interrupt and ask questions. I have a large legal problem that I have been dealing with for 1.5 years and have worked with four different attornies over that time and get along just fine with all of them. One attorney, I have worked with exclusively for the 1.5 years to present. This issue I was dealing with was an ailing mother who was being taken advantage of by a corrupt Fiduciary. Ironically, Michael's mother began a demise in the middle of his service to me. it disrupted his ability to respond to me in a timely manner, for which I was very understanding and compassionate. I only wish he would have extended the same care and compassion to my situation with my mother. I was referred to Michael by the Sonoma County Lawyer Referal system. They had previously sent me two very competent attornies whom I have enjoyed working with. Michael is the exception. When you hire an attorney, just know that they can never guarantee any result. They get paid whether you get results or not. My impression of Michael is that he is no longer passionate about his practice, he seemed lackluster and burned out (before the issue with his mother) and I did not get a sense that he cared one way or another about my needs.

I hired Mr Larsen to take care of my fathers estate after my farther passed. It should have been an easy job, but when problems kept coming up he took care of them. I appreciate all the hard Mr Lawson had done for me.

I sought the services of Mr. Larsen in response to my husband's unexpected death. Complications regarding my husband's corporation and the absence of a will created a frightening journey for me in the face of unfathomable loss. Mr. Larsen was exceptionally sensitive and patient, explaining everything carefully and providing attention to my concerns in a timely manner. Where choices between actions were necessary, he presented the options in detail and with clarity. I found Mr. Larsen enormously helpful to me in navigating this process, and gladly recommend him without reservation.

I hired Mr. Larsen to complete two tasks: 1) To get questions answered by the attorney who represented a corrupt Fiduciary I was dealing with 2) To review my Trust document and advise me My Larsen failed to get any answers from the attorney, and in fact, notified me that the other attorney did all the talking on my dime, when what I hired Michael to do was to inform the attorney of my dissatisfaction of his client, the corrupt Fiduciary. The main question I needed answered was if the Fiduciary would approve funding for my mother (her client) to be represented by her own attorney. The attorney I asked Michael to approach, whom he happened to know personally, refused to answer that basic question, and Michael did not even confront him about it. I had to point it out to Michael and ask him to send a repeat email to the attorney and point out that he had not answered the question. He did so at my expense. When I hired Michael he said "you need to show them that you mean business", however, he was extremely passive in his role and yielded no beneficial information. The other issue was asking the Fiduciary to remove herself from the Conservatorship. In the end, Michael advised me to have my mother get her own attorney, which is the only way that would be effective in having a Fiduciary step down or be replaced. He should have known that and advised me of it upfront - that I had no real power in the matter. Also, I mentioned to him that I had a very common legal document executed in regards to my mother - another Estate Attorney had accomplished that for me. Michael had no idea what that common legal document was. In regards to my simple Trust, when I asked a basic question about it, (after I paid him for 5 hours time to review it, one other document and one phone call and email with the other attorney) he stated that he would need to be paid for more time to review the Trust again. Ridiculous. The most challenging problem I had with Michael Larsen is that he took every opportunity to instill fear in me, in order to convince me that I needed to give him more paid hours. He said it was his "duty" to inform me of my legal vulnerabilities - which I was already aware of. He tried to convince me that if this or that happened, in the future, that it would be very bad - intimating that I should invest in more money in him to prevent something that may not even ever happen, and not related to the problem at hand that I was dealing with. I also did not appreciate his style of communication with me which I found to be very condescending. He rallied on and on about what the other attorney said and would not let me interrupt and ask questions. I have a large legal problem that I have been dealing with for 1.5 years and have worked with four different attornies over that time and get along just fine with all of them. One attorney, I have worked with exclusively for the 1.5 years to present. This issue I was dealing with was an ailing mother who was being taken advantage of by a corrupt Fiduciary. Ironically, Michael's mother began a demise in the middle of his service to me. it disrupted his ability to respond to me in a timely manner, for which I was very understanding and compassionate. I only wish he would have extended the same care and compassion to my situation with my mother. I was referred to Michael by the Sonoma County Lawyer Referal system. They had previously sent me two very competent attornies whom I have enjoyed working with. Michael is the exception. When you hire an attorney, just know that they can never guarantee any result. They get paid whether you get results or not. My impression of Michael is that he is no longer passionate about his practice, he seemed lackluster and burned out (before the issue with his mother) and I did not get a sense that he cared one way or another about my needs.

I hired Mr Larsen to take care of my fathers estate after my farther passed. It should have been an easy job, but when problems kept coming up he took care of them. I appreciate all the hard Mr Lawson had done for me.

I sought the services of Mr. Larsen in response to my husband's unexpected death. Complications regarding my husband's corporation and the absence of a will created a frightening journey for me in the face of unfathomable loss. Mr. Larsen was exceptionally sensitive and patient, explaining everything carefully and providing attention to my concerns in a timely manner. Where choices between actions were necessary, he presented the options in detail and with clarity. I found Mr. Larsen enormously helpful to me in navigating this process, and gladly recommend him without reservation.

I hired Mr. Larsen to complete two tasks: 1) To get questions answered by the attorney who represented a corrupt Fiduciary I was dealing with 2) To review my Trust document and advise me My Larsen failed to get any answers from the attorney, and in fact, notified me that the other attorney did all the talking on my dime, when what I hired Michael to do was to inform the attorney of my dissatisfaction of his client, the corrupt Fiduciary. The main question I needed answered was if the Fiduciary would approve funding for my mother (her client) to be represented by her own attorney. The attorney I asked Michael to approach, whom he happened to know personally, refused to answer that basic question, and Michael did not even confront him about it. I had to point it out to Michael and ask him to send a repeat email to the attorney and point out that he had not answered the question. He did so at my expense. When I hired Michael he said "you need to show them that you mean business", however, he was extremely passive in his role and yielded no beneficial information. The other issue was asking the Fiduciary to remove herself from the Conservatorship. In the end, Michael advised me to have my mother get her own attorney, which is the only way that would be effective in having a Fiduciary step down or be replaced. He should have known that and advised me of it upfront - that I had no real power in the matter. Also, I mentioned to him that I had a very common legal document executed in regards to my mother - another Estate Attorney had accomplished that for me. Michael had no idea what that common legal document was. In regards to my simple Trust, when I asked a basic question about it, (after I paid him for 5 hours time to review it, one other document and one phone call and email with the other attorney) he stated that he would need to be paid for more time to review the Trust again. Ridiculous. The most challenging problem I had with Michael Larsen is that he took every opportunity to instill fear in me, in order to convince me that I needed to give him more paid hours. He said it was his "duty" to inform me of my legal vulnerabilities - which I was already aware of. He tried to convince me that if this or that happened, in the future, that it would be very bad - intimating that I should invest in more money in him to prevent something that may not even ever happen, and not related to the problem at hand that I was dealing with. I also did not appreciate his style of communication with me which I found to be very condescending. He rallied on and on about what the other attorney said and would not let me interrupt and ask questions. I have a large legal problem that I have been dealing with for 1.5 years and have worked with four different attornies over that time and get along just fine with all of them. One attorney, I have worked with exclusively for the 1.5 years to present. This issue I was dealing with was an ailing mother who was being taken advantage of by a corrupt Fiduciary. Ironically, Michael's mother began a demise in the middle of his service to me. it disrupted his ability to respond to me in a timely manner, for which I was very understanding and compassionate. I only wish he would have extended the same care and compassion to my situation with my mother. I was referred to Michael by the Sonoma County Lawyer Referal system. They had previously sent me two very competent attornies whom I have enjoyed working with. Michael is the exception. When you hire an attorney, just know that they can never guarantee any result. They get paid whether you get results or not. My impression of Michael is that he is no longer passionate about his practice, he seemed lackluster and burned out (before the issue with his mother) and I did not get a sense that he cared one way or another about my needs.

I hired Mr Larsen to take care of my fathers estate after my farther passed. It should have been an easy job, but when problems kept coming up he took care of them. I appreciate all the hard Mr Lawson had done for me.

I sought the services of Mr. Larsen in response to my husband's unexpected death. Complications regarding my husband's corporation and the absence of a will created a frightening journey for me in the face of unfathomable loss. Mr. Larsen was exceptionally sensitive and patient, explaining everything carefully and providing attention to my concerns in a timely manner. Where choices between actions were necessary, he presented the options in detail and with clarity. I found Mr. Larsen enormously helpful to me in navigating this process, and gladly recommend him without reservation.

I hired Mr. Larsen to complete two tasks: 1) To get questions answered by the attorney who represented a corrupt Fiduciary I was dealing with 2) To review my Trust document and advise me My Larsen failed to get any answers from the attorney, and in fact, notified me that the other attorney did all the talking on my dime, when what I hired Michael to do was to inform the attorney of my dissatisfaction of his client, the corrupt Fiduciary. The main question I needed answered was if the Fiduciary would approve funding for my mother (her client) to be represented by her own attorney. The attorney I asked Michael to approach, whom he happened to know personally, refused to answer that basic question, and Michael did not even confront him about it. I had to point it out to Michael and ask him to send a repeat email to the attorney and point out that he had not answered the question. He did so at my expense. When I hired Michael he said "you need to show them that you mean business", however, he was extremely passive in his role and yielded no beneficial information. The other issue was asking the Fiduciary to remove herself from the Conservatorship. In the end, Michael advised me to have my mother get her own attorney, which is the only way that would be effective in having a Fiduciary step down or be replaced. He should have known that and advised me of it upfront - that I had no real power in the matter. Also, I mentioned to him that I had a very common legal document executed in regards to my mother - another Estate Attorney had accomplished that for me. Michael had no idea what that common legal document was. In regards to my simple Trust, when I asked a basic question about it, (after I paid him for 5 hours time to review it, one other document and one phone call and email with the other attorney) he stated that he would need to be paid for more time to review the Trust again. Ridiculous. The most challenging problem I had with Michael Larsen is that he took every opportunity to instill fear in me, in order to convince me that I needed to give him more paid hours. He said it was his "duty" to inform me of my legal vulnerabilities - which I was already aware of. He tried to convince me that if this or that happened, in the future, that it would be very bad - intimating that I should invest in more money in him to prevent something that may not even ever happen, and not related to the problem at hand that I was dealing with. I also did not appreciate his style of communication with me which I found to be very condescending. He rallied on and on about what the other attorney said and would not let me interrupt and ask questions. I have a large legal problem that I have been dealing with for 1.5 years and have worked with four different attornies over that time and get along just fine with all of them. One attorney, I have worked with exclusively for the 1.5 years to present. This issue I was dealing with was an ailing mother who was being taken advantage of by a corrupt Fiduciary. Ironically, Michael's mother began a demise in the middle of his service to me. it disrupted his ability to respond to me in a timely manner, for which I was very understanding and compassionate. I only wish he would have extended the same care and compassion to my situation with my mother. I was referred to Michael by the Sonoma County Lawyer Referal system. They had previously sent me two very competent attornies whom I have enjoyed working with. Michael is the exception. When you hire an attorney, just know that they can never guarantee any result. They get paid whether you get results or not. My impression of Michael is that he is no longer passionate about his practice, he seemed lackluster and burned out (before the issue with his mother) and I did not get a sense that he cared one way or another about my needs.

I hired Mr Larsen to take care of my fathers estate after my farther passed. It should have been an easy job, but when problems kept coming up he took care of them. I appreciate all the hard Mr Lawson had done for me.

I sought the services of Mr. Larsen in response to my husband's unexpected death. Complications regarding my husband's corporation and the absence of a will created a frightening journey for me in the face of unfathomable loss. Mr. Larsen was exceptionally sensitive and patient, explaining everything carefully and providing attention to my concerns in a timely manner. Where choices between actions were necessary, he presented the options in detail and with clarity. I found Mr. Larsen enormously helpful to me in navigating this process, and gladly recommend him without reservation.

I hired Mr. Larsen to complete two tasks: 1) To get questions answered by the attorney who represented a corrupt Fiduciary I was dealing with 2) To review my Trust document and advise me My Larsen failed to get any answers from the attorney, and in fact, notified me that the other attorney did all the talking on my dime, when what I hired Michael to do was to inform the attorney of my dissatisfaction of his client, the corrupt Fiduciary. The main question I needed answered was if the Fiduciary would approve funding for my mother (her client) to be represented by her own attorney. The attorney I asked Michael to approach, whom he happened to know personally, refused to answer that basic question, and Michael did not even confront him about it. I had to point it out to Michael and ask him to send a repeat email to the attorney and point out that he had not answered the question. He did so at my expense. When I hired Michael he said "you need to show them that you mean business", however, he was extremely passive in his role and yielded no beneficial information. The other issue was asking the Fiduciary to remove herself from the Conservatorship. In the end, Michael advised me to have my mother get her own attorney, which is the only way that would be effective in having a Fiduciary step down or be replaced. He should have known that and advised me of it upfront - that I had no real power in the matter. Also, I mentioned to him that I had a very common legal document executed in regards to my mother - another Estate Attorney had accomplished that for me. Michael had no idea what that common legal document was. In regards to my simple Trust, when I asked a basic question about it, (after I paid him for 5 hours time to review it, one other document and one phone call and email with the other attorney) he stated that he would need to be paid for more time to review the Trust again. Ridiculous. The most challenging problem I had with Michael Larsen is that he took every opportunity to instill fear in me, in order to convince me that I needed to give him more paid hours. He said it was his "duty" to inform me of my legal vulnerabilities - which I was already aware of. He tried to convince me that if this or that happened, in the future, that it would be very bad - intimating that I should invest in more money in him to prevent something that may not even ever happen, and not related to the problem at hand that I was dealing with. I also did not appreciate his style of communication with me which I found to be very condescending. He rallied on and on about what the other attorney said and would not let me interrupt and ask questions. I have a large legal problem that I have been dealing with for 1.5 years and have worked with four different attornies over that time and get along just fine with all of them. One attorney, I have worked with exclusively for the 1.5 years to present. This issue I was dealing with was an ailing mother who was being taken advantage of by a corrupt Fiduciary. Ironically, Michael's mother began a demise in the middle of his service to me. it disrupted his ability to respond to me in a timely manner, for which I was very understanding and compassionate. I only wish he would have extended the same care and compassion to my situation with my mother. I was referred to Michael by the Sonoma County Lawyer Referal system. They had previously sent me two very competent attornies whom I have enjoyed working with. Michael is the exception. When you hire an attorney, just know that they can never guarantee any result. They get paid whether you get results or not. My impression of Michael is that he is no longer passionate about his practice, he seemed lackluster and burned out (before the issue with his mother) and I did not get a sense that he cared one way or another about my needs.

I hired Mr Larsen to take care of my fathers estate after my farther passed. It should have been an easy job, but when problems kept coming up he took care of them. I appreciate all the hard Mr Lawson had done for me.

I sought the services of Mr. Larsen in response to my husband's unexpected death. Complications regarding my husband's corporation and the absence of a will created a frightening journey for me in the face of unfathomable loss. Mr. Larsen was exceptionally sensitive and patient, explaining everything carefully and providing attention to my concerns in a timely manner. Where choices between actions were necessary, he presented the options in detail and with clarity. I found Mr. Larsen enormously helpful to me in navigating this process, and gladly recommend him without reservation.

I hired Mr. Larsen to complete two tasks: 1) To get questions answered by the attorney who represented a corrupt Fiduciary I was dealing with 2) To review my Trust document and advise me My Larsen failed to get any answers from the attorney, and in fact, notified me that the other attorney did all the talking on my dime, when what I hired Michael to do was to inform the attorney of my dissatisfaction of his client, the corrupt Fiduciary. The main question I needed answered was if the Fiduciary would approve funding for my mother (her client) to be represented by her own attorney. The attorney I asked Michael to approach, whom he happened to know personally, refused to answer that basic question, and Michael did not even confront him about it. I had to point it out to Michael and ask him to send a repeat email to the attorney and point out that he had not answered the question. He did so at my expense. When I hired Michael he said "you need to show them that you mean business", however, he was extremely passive in his role and yielded no beneficial information. The other issue was asking the Fiduciary to remove herself from the Conservatorship. In the end, Michael advised me to have my mother get her own attorney, which is the only way that would be effective in having a Fiduciary step down or be replaced. He should have known that and advised me of it upfront - that I had no real power in the matter. Also, I mentioned to him that I had a very common legal document executed in regards to my mother - another Estate Attorney had accomplished that for me. Michael had no idea what that common legal document was. In regards to my simple Trust, when I asked a basic question about it, (after I paid him for 5 hours time to review it, one other document and one phone call and email with the other attorney) he stated that he would need to be paid for more time to review the Trust again. Ridiculous. The most challenging problem I had with Michael Larsen is that he took every opportunity to instill fear in me, in order to convince me that I needed to give him more paid hours. He said it was his "duty" to inform me of my legal vulnerabilities - which I was already aware of. He tried to convince me that if this or that happened, in the future, that it would be very bad - intimating that I should invest in more money in him to prevent something that may not even ever happen, and not related to the problem at hand that I was dealing with. I also did not appreciate his style of communication with me which I found to be very condescending. He rallied on and on about what the other attorney said and would not let me interrupt and ask questions. I have a large legal problem that I have been dealing with for 1.5 years and have worked with four different attornies over that time and get along just fine with all of them. One attorney, I have worked with exclusively for the 1.5 years to present. This issue I was dealing with was an ailing mother who was being taken advantage of by a corrupt Fiduciary. Ironically, Michael's mother began a demise in the middle of his service to me. it disrupted his ability to respond to me in a timely manner, for which I was very understanding and compassionate. I only wish he would have extended the same care and compassion to my situation with my mother. I was referred to Michael by the Sonoma County Lawyer Referal system. They had previously sent me two very competent attornies whom I have enjoyed working with. Michael is the exception. When you hire an attorney, just know that they can never guarantee any result. They get paid whether you get results or not. My impression of Michael is that he is no longer passionate about his practice, he seemed lackluster and burned out (before the issue with his mother) and I did not get a sense that he cared one way or another about my needs.