I was named as the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit resulting from a collision between a female pedestrian and myself as I was riding a bicycle. Paul Schroeder represented me in this matter over 14 months of litigation resulting in an eventual settlement. My choice of this attorney was one of the best moves I have ever made in my life. Paul’s performance as a litigator was superb. If I were to recount every example of the ways in which he out-lawyered the opposing counsel this letter would be too long. I will recount one. Early in my case Paul deposed a witness. His first questions to the witness puzzled me. They did not seem relevant. Later on in the deposition, when the plaintiff’s lawyer started asking speculative questions to the witness I realized that Paul had anticipated what kinds of questions his opponent would ask, and the kinds of opinionated answers that the witness might offer. The witness’ answers to Paul’s earlier “irrelevant” questions were now on the record and would either serve to keep the witness’ later answers consistent with his earlier answers, or would serve to trap the witness into a contradiction if his later answers were contrary or hypocritical. This was brilliant lawyering. Over time I came to appreciate that Paul knows what he knows and he knows what he doesn’t know. He has built a fine network of advisors and experts to brief him on subjects of relevance and he also performs his own very effective research whenever needed. My written and oral conversations with Paul were very productive, economical and effective. Never once did he and I have to spend any valuable time clearing up any misunderstandings or re-establishing any previous understanding or making substantial revisions to any legal document drafts. I am still astonished by how well Paul always grasped whatever thoughts or details I shared with him, always getting it right and complete the first time. I was an engaged and energetic client. Paul always treated my opinions with respect and made use of them when they were useful. He is a master of “pre-suasion”, guiding his listener to come to the wisest conclusions on his own rather than having to hear it first from Paul’s mouth. He served as a cool, level-headed, calm counterweight to my competitiveness and eagerness. Yet I have no doubt that he can inject some heat into a timid, cautious client’s thinking when it is in his client’s interest. Paul of course was aware that I had to defend myself at my own expense. I will be forever grateful to him for a number of ways in which he was considerate of my financial situation and delivered exceptional value. For instance, Paul found a no-cost venue for a mediation session. He also made resourceful and cost-effective use of his network of experts. And, most importantly of all, as mentioned above, I did not have to pay for re-work or uneconomical communications because Paul characteristically got things right the first time. Litigation is painfully expensive but I was always happy when I paid Paul. Money well spent. I am also happy to recommend his services to you. Please be assured that it is in your interest to consider this fine lawyer for your own needs.

My only experience with Paul so far has been the initial answer to my question. However, based upon the clear, concise information that he provided I am absolutely positive that I will use his services if I decide that I want to continue this matter. Paul’s written response pointed me to the section of the contract that I needed to examine. Paul also followed up with a phone call. He was courteous, knowledgeable and a completely enjoyable person to talk to. Using the information he provided, I was able to finally determine that I am up the creek without the proverbial paddle.

Paul is an awesome business attorney. Even in the confusing world of California ABC law, he's helped up understand the best ways to reach our goals while navigating the convoluted rules and regulations. And his attention to detail has saved us more than once when dealing with everything from our business contracts to our insurance coverage.

Paul helped me with a mediation involving a dispute with a contractor who, according to my estimation, overcharged me by over $100K. Paul drew up a mediation brief that provided a compelling case for a refund from the contractor. He also advised me when the contractor threatened to sue me for libel regarding honest online reviews i posted detailing the experience with the contractor; the contractor did not follow through with the threat to sue. Paul is a very personable professional who gives his best effort to help resolve problems and is a pleasure to work with.

Paul does a great job of follow up which I have found to be if not lacking at least tardy with many other attorneys. We feel to be a priority for him.

I was named as the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit resulting from a collision between a female pedestrian and myself as I was riding a bicycle. Paul Schroeder represented me in this matter over 14 months of litigation resulting in an eventual settlement. My choice of this attorney was one of the best moves I have ever made in my life. Paul’s performance as a litigator was superb. If I were to recount every example of the ways in which he out-lawyered the opposing counsel this letter would be too long. I will recount one. Early in my case Paul deposed a witness. His first questions to the witness puzzled me. They did not seem relevant. Later on in the deposition, when the plaintiff’s lawyer started asking speculative questions to the witness I realized that Paul had anticipated what kinds of questions his opponent would ask, and the kinds of opinionated answers that the witness might offer. The witness’ answers to Paul’s earlier “irrelevant” questions were now on the record and would either serve to keep the witness’ later answers consistent with his earlier answers, or would serve to trap the witness into a contradiction if his later answers were contrary or hypocritical. This was brilliant lawyering. Over time I came to appreciate that Paul knows what he knows and he knows what he doesn’t know. He has built a fine network of advisors and experts to brief him on subjects of relevance and he also performs his own very effective research whenever needed. My written and oral conversations with Paul were very productive, economical and effective. Never once did he and I have to spend any valuable time clearing up any misunderstandings or re-establishing any previous understanding or making substantial revisions to any legal document drafts. I am still astonished by how well Paul always grasped whatever thoughts or details I shared with him, always getting it right and complete the first time. I was an engaged and energetic client. Paul always treated my opinions with respect and made use of them when they were useful. He is a master of “pre-suasion”, guiding his listener to come to the wisest conclusions on his own rather than having to hear it first from Paul’s mouth. He served as a cool, level-headed, calm counterweight to my competitiveness and eagerness. Yet I have no doubt that he can inject some heat into a timid, cautious client’s thinking when it is in his client’s interest. Paul of course was aware that I had to defend myself at my own expense. I will be forever grateful to him for a number of ways in which he was considerate of my financial situation and delivered exceptional value. For instance, Paul found a no-cost venue for a mediation session. He also made resourceful and cost-effective use of his network of experts. And, most importantly of all, as mentioned above, I did not have to pay for re-work or uneconomical communications because Paul characteristically got things right the first time. Litigation is painfully expensive but I was always happy when I paid Paul. Money well spent. I am also happy to recommend his services to you. Please be assured that it is in your interest to consider this fine lawyer for your own needs.

My only experience with Paul so far has been the initial answer to my question. However, based upon the clear, concise information that he provided I am absolutely positive that I will use his services if I decide that I want to continue this matter. Paul’s written response pointed me to the section of the contract that I needed to examine. Paul also followed up with a phone call. He was courteous, knowledgeable and a completely enjoyable person to talk to. Using the information he provided, I was able to finally determine that I am up the creek without the proverbial paddle.

Paul is an awesome business attorney. Even in the confusing world of California ABC law, he's helped up understand the best ways to reach our goals while navigating the convoluted rules and regulations. And his attention to detail has saved us more than once when dealing with everything from our business contracts to our insurance coverage.

Paul helped me with a mediation involving a dispute with a contractor who, according to my estimation, overcharged me by over $100K. Paul drew up a mediation brief that provided a compelling case for a refund from the contractor. He also advised me when the contractor threatened to sue me for libel regarding honest online reviews i posted detailing the experience with the contractor; the contractor did not follow through with the threat to sue. Paul is a very personable professional who gives his best effort to help resolve problems and is a pleasure to work with.

Paul does a great job of follow up which I have found to be if not lacking at least tardy with many other attorneys. We feel to be a priority for him.

I was named as the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit resulting from a collision between a female pedestrian and myself as I was riding a bicycle. Paul Schroeder represented me in this matter over 14 months of litigation resulting in an eventual settlement. My choice of this attorney was one of the best moves I have ever made in my life. Paul’s performance as a litigator was superb. If I were to recount every example of the ways in which he out-lawyered the opposing counsel this letter would be too long. I will recount one. Early in my case Paul deposed a witness. His first questions to the witness puzzled me. They did not seem relevant. Later on in the deposition, when the plaintiff’s lawyer started asking speculative questions to the witness I realized that Paul had anticipated what kinds of questions his opponent would ask, and the kinds of opinionated answers that the witness might offer. The witness’ answers to Paul’s earlier “irrelevant” questions were now on the record and would either serve to keep the witness’ later answers consistent with his earlier answers, or would serve to trap the witness into a contradiction if his later answers were contrary or hypocritical. This was brilliant lawyering. Over time I came to appreciate that Paul knows what he knows and he knows what he doesn’t know. He has built a fine network of advisors and experts to brief him on subjects of relevance and he also performs his own very effective research whenever needed. My written and oral conversations with Paul were very productive, economical and effective. Never once did he and I have to spend any valuable time clearing up any misunderstandings or re-establishing any previous understanding or making substantial revisions to any legal document drafts. I am still astonished by how well Paul always grasped whatever thoughts or details I shared with him, always getting it right and complete the first time. I was an engaged and energetic client. Paul always treated my opinions with respect and made use of them when they were useful. He is a master of “pre-suasion”, guiding his listener to come to the wisest conclusions on his own rather than having to hear it first from Paul’s mouth. He served as a cool, level-headed, calm counterweight to my competitiveness and eagerness. Yet I have no doubt that he can inject some heat into a timid, cautious client’s thinking when it is in his client’s interest. Paul of course was aware that I had to defend myself at my own expense. I will be forever grateful to him for a number of ways in which he was considerate of my financial situation and delivered exceptional value. For instance, Paul found a no-cost venue for a mediation session. He also made resourceful and cost-effective use of his network of experts. And, most importantly of all, as mentioned above, I did not have to pay for re-work or uneconomical communications because Paul characteristically got things right the first time. Litigation is painfully expensive but I was always happy when I paid Paul. Money well spent. I am also happy to recommend his services to you. Please be assured that it is in your interest to consider this fine lawyer for your own needs.

My only experience with Paul so far has been the initial answer to my question. However, based upon the clear, concise information that he provided I am absolutely positive that I will use his services if I decide that I want to continue this matter. Paul’s written response pointed me to the section of the contract that I needed to examine. Paul also followed up with a phone call. He was courteous, knowledgeable and a completely enjoyable person to talk to. Using the information he provided, I was able to finally determine that I am up the creek without the proverbial paddle.

Paul is an awesome business attorney. Even in the confusing world of California ABC law, he's helped up understand the best ways to reach our goals while navigating the convoluted rules and regulations. And his attention to detail has saved us more than once when dealing with everything from our business contracts to our insurance coverage.

Paul helped me with a mediation involving a dispute with a contractor who, according to my estimation, overcharged me by over $100K. Paul drew up a mediation brief that provided a compelling case for a refund from the contractor. He also advised me when the contractor threatened to sue me for libel regarding honest online reviews i posted detailing the experience with the contractor; the contractor did not follow through with the threat to sue. Paul is a very personable professional who gives his best effort to help resolve problems and is a pleasure to work with.

Paul does a great job of follow up which I have found to be if not lacking at least tardy with many other attorneys. We feel to be a priority for him.

I was named as the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit resulting from a collision between a female pedestrian and myself as I was riding a bicycle. Paul Schroeder represented me in this matter over 14 months of litigation resulting in an eventual settlement. My choice of this attorney was one of the best moves I have ever made in my life. Paul’s performance as a litigator was superb. If I were to recount every example of the ways in which he out-lawyered the opposing counsel this letter would be too long. I will recount one. Early in my case Paul deposed a witness. His first questions to the witness puzzled me. They did not seem relevant. Later on in the deposition, when the plaintiff’s lawyer started asking speculative questions to the witness I realized that Paul had anticipated what kinds of questions his opponent would ask, and the kinds of opinionated answers that the witness might offer. The witness’ answers to Paul’s earlier “irrelevant” questions were now on the record and would either serve to keep the witness’ later answers consistent with his earlier answers, or would serve to trap the witness into a contradiction if his later answers were contrary or hypocritical. This was brilliant lawyering. Over time I came to appreciate that Paul knows what he knows and he knows what he doesn’t know. He has built a fine network of advisors and experts to brief him on subjects of relevance and he also performs his own very effective research whenever needed. My written and oral conversations with Paul were very productive, economical and effective. Never once did he and I have to spend any valuable time clearing up any misunderstandings or re-establishing any previous understanding or making substantial revisions to any legal document drafts. I am still astonished by how well Paul always grasped whatever thoughts or details I shared with him, always getting it right and complete the first time. I was an engaged and energetic client. Paul always treated my opinions with respect and made use of them when they were useful. He is a master of “pre-suasion”, guiding his listener to come to the wisest conclusions on his own rather than having to hear it first from Paul’s mouth. He served as a cool, level-headed, calm counterweight to my competitiveness and eagerness. Yet I have no doubt that he can inject some heat into a timid, cautious client’s thinking when it is in his client’s interest. Paul of course was aware that I had to defend myself at my own expense. I will be forever grateful to him for a number of ways in which he was considerate of my financial situation and delivered exceptional value. For instance, Paul found a no-cost venue for a mediation session. He also made resourceful and cost-effective use of his network of experts. And, most importantly of all, as mentioned above, I did not have to pay for re-work or uneconomical communications because Paul characteristically got things right the first time. Litigation is painfully expensive but I was always happy when I paid Paul. Money well spent. I am also happy to recommend his services to you. Please be assured that it is in your interest to consider this fine lawyer for your own needs.

My only experience with Paul so far has been the initial answer to my question. However, based upon the clear, concise information that he provided I am absolutely positive that I will use his services if I decide that I want to continue this matter. Paul’s written response pointed me to the section of the contract that I needed to examine. Paul also followed up with a phone call. He was courteous, knowledgeable and a completely enjoyable person to talk to. Using the information he provided, I was able to finally determine that I am up the creek without the proverbial paddle.

Paul is an awesome business attorney. Even in the confusing world of California ABC law, he's helped up understand the best ways to reach our goals while navigating the convoluted rules and regulations. And his attention to detail has saved us more than once when dealing with everything from our business contracts to our insurance coverage.

Paul helped me with a mediation involving a dispute with a contractor who, according to my estimation, overcharged me by over $100K. Paul drew up a mediation brief that provided a compelling case for a refund from the contractor. He also advised me when the contractor threatened to sue me for libel regarding honest online reviews i posted detailing the experience with the contractor; the contractor did not follow through with the threat to sue. Paul is a very personable professional who gives his best effort to help resolve problems and is a pleasure to work with.

Paul does a great job of follow up which I have found to be if not lacking at least tardy with many other attorneys. We feel to be a priority for him.

I was named as the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit resulting from a collision between a female pedestrian and myself as I was riding a bicycle. Paul Schroeder represented me in this matter over 14 months of litigation resulting in an eventual settlement. My choice of this attorney was one of the best moves I have ever made in my life. Paul’s performance as a litigator was superb. If I were to recount every example of the ways in which he out-lawyered the opposing counsel this letter would be too long. I will recount one. Early in my case Paul deposed a witness. His first questions to the witness puzzled me. They did not seem relevant. Later on in the deposition, when the plaintiff’s lawyer started asking speculative questions to the witness I realized that Paul had anticipated what kinds of questions his opponent would ask, and the kinds of opinionated answers that the witness might offer. The witness’ answers to Paul’s earlier “irrelevant” questions were now on the record and would either serve to keep the witness’ later answers consistent with his earlier answers, or would serve to trap the witness into a contradiction if his later answers were contrary or hypocritical. This was brilliant lawyering. Over time I came to appreciate that Paul knows what he knows and he knows what he doesn’t know. He has built a fine network of advisors and experts to brief him on subjects of relevance and he also performs his own very effective research whenever needed. My written and oral conversations with Paul were very productive, economical and effective. Never once did he and I have to spend any valuable time clearing up any misunderstandings or re-establishing any previous understanding or making substantial revisions to any legal document drafts. I am still astonished by how well Paul always grasped whatever thoughts or details I shared with him, always getting it right and complete the first time. I was an engaged and energetic client. Paul always treated my opinions with respect and made use of them when they were useful. He is a master of “pre-suasion”, guiding his listener to come to the wisest conclusions on his own rather than having to hear it first from Paul’s mouth. He served as a cool, level-headed, calm counterweight to my competitiveness and eagerness. Yet I have no doubt that he can inject some heat into a timid, cautious client’s thinking when it is in his client’s interest. Paul of course was aware that I had to defend myself at my own expense. I will be forever grateful to him for a number of ways in which he was considerate of my financial situation and delivered exceptional value. For instance, Paul found a no-cost venue for a mediation session. He also made resourceful and cost-effective use of his network of experts. And, most importantly of all, as mentioned above, I did not have to pay for re-work or uneconomical communications because Paul characteristically got things right the first time. Litigation is painfully expensive but I was always happy when I paid Paul. Money well spent. I am also happy to recommend his services to you. Please be assured that it is in your interest to consider this fine lawyer for your own needs.

My only experience with Paul so far has been the initial answer to my question. However, based upon the clear, concise information that he provided I am absolutely positive that I will use his services if I decide that I want to continue this matter. Paul’s written response pointed me to the section of the contract that I needed to examine. Paul also followed up with a phone call. He was courteous, knowledgeable and a completely enjoyable person to talk to. Using the information he provided, I was able to finally determine that I am up the creek without the proverbial paddle.

Paul is an awesome business attorney. Even in the confusing world of California ABC law, he's helped up understand the best ways to reach our goals while navigating the convoluted rules and regulations. And his attention to detail has saved us more than once when dealing with everything from our business contracts to our insurance coverage.

Paul helped me with a mediation involving a dispute with a contractor who, according to my estimation, overcharged me by over $100K. Paul drew up a mediation brief that provided a compelling case for a refund from the contractor. He also advised me when the contractor threatened to sue me for libel regarding honest online reviews i posted detailing the experience with the contractor; the contractor did not follow through with the threat to sue. Paul is a very personable professional who gives his best effort to help resolve problems and is a pleasure to work with.

Paul does a great job of follow up which I have found to be if not lacking at least tardy with many other attorneys. We feel to be a priority for him.

I was named as the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit resulting from a collision between a female pedestrian and myself as I was riding a bicycle. Paul Schroeder represented me in this matter over 14 months of litigation resulting in an eventual settlement. My choice of this attorney was one of the best moves I have ever made in my life. Paul’s performance as a litigator was superb. If I were to recount every example of the ways in which he out-lawyered the opposing counsel this letter would be too long. I will recount one. Early in my case Paul deposed a witness. His first questions to the witness puzzled me. They did not seem relevant. Later on in the deposition, when the plaintiff’s lawyer started asking speculative questions to the witness I realized that Paul had anticipated what kinds of questions his opponent would ask, and the kinds of opinionated answers that the witness might offer. The witness’ answers to Paul’s earlier “irrelevant” questions were now on the record and would either serve to keep the witness’ later answers consistent with his earlier answers, or would serve to trap the witness into a contradiction if his later answers were contrary or hypocritical. This was brilliant lawyering. Over time I came to appreciate that Paul knows what he knows and he knows what he doesn’t know. He has built a fine network of advisors and experts to brief him on subjects of relevance and he also performs his own very effective research whenever needed. My written and oral conversations with Paul were very productive, economical and effective. Never once did he and I have to spend any valuable time clearing up any misunderstandings or re-establishing any previous understanding or making substantial revisions to any legal document drafts. I am still astonished by how well Paul always grasped whatever thoughts or details I shared with him, always getting it right and complete the first time. I was an engaged and energetic client. Paul always treated my opinions with respect and made use of them when they were useful. He is a master of “pre-suasion”, guiding his listener to come to the wisest conclusions on his own rather than having to hear it first from Paul’s mouth. He served as a cool, level-headed, calm counterweight to my competitiveness and eagerness. Yet I have no doubt that he can inject some heat into a timid, cautious client’s thinking when it is in his client’s interest. Paul of course was aware that I had to defend myself at my own expense. I will be forever grateful to him for a number of ways in which he was considerate of my financial situation and delivered exceptional value. For instance, Paul found a no-cost venue for a mediation session. He also made resourceful and cost-effective use of his network of experts. And, most importantly of all, as mentioned above, I did not have to pay for re-work or uneconomical communications because Paul characteristically got things right the first time. Litigation is painfully expensive but I was always happy when I paid Paul. Money well spent. I am also happy to recommend his services to you. Please be assured that it is in your interest to consider this fine lawyer for your own needs.

My only experience with Paul so far has been the initial answer to my question. However, based upon the clear, concise information that he provided I am absolutely positive that I will use his services if I decide that I want to continue this matter. Paul’s written response pointed me to the section of the contract that I needed to examine. Paul also followed up with a phone call. He was courteous, knowledgeable and a completely enjoyable person to talk to. Using the information he provided, I was able to finally determine that I am up the creek without the proverbial paddle.

Paul is an awesome business attorney. Even in the confusing world of California ABC law, he's helped up understand the best ways to reach our goals while navigating the convoluted rules and regulations. And his attention to detail has saved us more than once when dealing with everything from our business contracts to our insurance coverage.

Paul helped me with a mediation involving a dispute with a contractor who, according to my estimation, overcharged me by over $100K. Paul drew up a mediation brief that provided a compelling case for a refund from the contractor. He also advised me when the contractor threatened to sue me for libel regarding honest online reviews i posted detailing the experience with the contractor; the contractor did not follow through with the threat to sue. Paul is a very personable professional who gives his best effort to help resolve problems and is a pleasure to work with.

Paul does a great job of follow up which I have found to be if not lacking at least tardy with many other attorneys. We feel to be a priority for him.

I was named as the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit resulting from a collision between a female pedestrian and myself as I was riding a bicycle. Paul Schroeder represented me in this matter over 14 months of litigation resulting in an eventual settlement. My choice of this attorney was one of the best moves I have ever made in my life. Paul’s performance as a litigator was superb. If I were to recount every example of the ways in which he out-lawyered the opposing counsel this letter would be too long. I will recount one. Early in my case Paul deposed a witness. His first questions to the witness puzzled me. They did not seem relevant. Later on in the deposition, when the plaintiff’s lawyer started asking speculative questions to the witness I realized that Paul had anticipated what kinds of questions his opponent would ask, and the kinds of opinionated answers that the witness might offer. The witness’ answers to Paul’s earlier “irrelevant” questions were now on the record and would either serve to keep the witness’ later answers consistent with his earlier answers, or would serve to trap the witness into a contradiction if his later answers were contrary or hypocritical. This was brilliant lawyering. Over time I came to appreciate that Paul knows what he knows and he knows what he doesn’t know. He has built a fine network of advisors and experts to brief him on subjects of relevance and he also performs his own very effective research whenever needed. My written and oral conversations with Paul were very productive, economical and effective. Never once did he and I have to spend any valuable time clearing up any misunderstandings or re-establishing any previous understanding or making substantial revisions to any legal document drafts. I am still astonished by how well Paul always grasped whatever thoughts or details I shared with him, always getting it right and complete the first time. I was an engaged and energetic client. Paul always treated my opinions with respect and made use of them when they were useful. He is a master of “pre-suasion”, guiding his listener to come to the wisest conclusions on his own rather than having to hear it first from Paul’s mouth. He served as a cool, level-headed, calm counterweight to my competitiveness and eagerness. Yet I have no doubt that he can inject some heat into a timid, cautious client’s thinking when it is in his client’s interest. Paul of course was aware that I had to defend myself at my own expense. I will be forever grateful to him for a number of ways in which he was considerate of my financial situation and delivered exceptional value. For instance, Paul found a no-cost venue for a mediation session. He also made resourceful and cost-effective use of his network of experts. And, most importantly of all, as mentioned above, I did not have to pay for re-work or uneconomical communications because Paul characteristically got things right the first time. Litigation is painfully expensive but I was always happy when I paid Paul. Money well spent. I am also happy to recommend his services to you. Please be assured that it is in your interest to consider this fine lawyer for your own needs.

My only experience with Paul so far has been the initial answer to my question. However, based upon the clear, concise information that he provided I am absolutely positive that I will use his services if I decide that I want to continue this matter. Paul’s written response pointed me to the section of the contract that I needed to examine. Paul also followed up with a phone call. He was courteous, knowledgeable and a completely enjoyable person to talk to. Using the information he provided, I was able to finally determine that I am up the creek without the proverbial paddle.

Paul is an awesome business attorney. Even in the confusing world of California ABC law, he's helped up understand the best ways to reach our goals while navigating the convoluted rules and regulations. And his attention to detail has saved us more than once when dealing with everything from our business contracts to our insurance coverage.

Paul helped me with a mediation involving a dispute with a contractor who, according to my estimation, overcharged me by over $100K. Paul drew up a mediation brief that provided a compelling case for a refund from the contractor. He also advised me when the contractor threatened to sue me for libel regarding honest online reviews i posted detailing the experience with the contractor; the contractor did not follow through with the threat to sue. Paul is a very personable professional who gives his best effort to help resolve problems and is a pleasure to work with.

Paul does a great job of follow up which I have found to be if not lacking at least tardy with many other attorneys. We feel to be a priority for him.

I was named as the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit resulting from a collision between a female pedestrian and myself as I was riding a bicycle. Paul Schroeder represented me in this matter over 14 months of litigation resulting in an eventual settlement. My choice of this attorney was one of the best moves I have ever made in my life. Paul’s performance as a litigator was superb. If I were to recount every example of the ways in which he out-lawyered the opposing counsel this letter would be too long. I will recount one. Early in my case Paul deposed a witness. His first questions to the witness puzzled me. They did not seem relevant. Later on in the deposition, when the plaintiff’s lawyer started asking speculative questions to the witness I realized that Paul had anticipated what kinds of questions his opponent would ask, and the kinds of opinionated answers that the witness might offer. The witness’ answers to Paul’s earlier “irrelevant” questions were now on the record and would either serve to keep the witness’ later answers consistent with his earlier answers, or would serve to trap the witness into a contradiction if his later answers were contrary or hypocritical. This was brilliant lawyering. Over time I came to appreciate that Paul knows what he knows and he knows what he doesn’t know. He has built a fine network of advisors and experts to brief him on subjects of relevance and he also performs his own very effective research whenever needed. My written and oral conversations with Paul were very productive, economical and effective. Never once did he and I have to spend any valuable time clearing up any misunderstandings or re-establishing any previous understanding or making substantial revisions to any legal document drafts. I am still astonished by how well Paul always grasped whatever thoughts or details I shared with him, always getting it right and complete the first time. I was an engaged and energetic client. Paul always treated my opinions with respect and made use of them when they were useful. He is a master of “pre-suasion”, guiding his listener to come to the wisest conclusions on his own rather than having to hear it first from Paul’s mouth. He served as a cool, level-headed, calm counterweight to my competitiveness and eagerness. Yet I have no doubt that he can inject some heat into a timid, cautious client’s thinking when it is in his client’s interest. Paul of course was aware that I had to defend myself at my own expense. I will be forever grateful to him for a number of ways in which he was considerate of my financial situation and delivered exceptional value. For instance, Paul found a no-cost venue for a mediation session. He also made resourceful and cost-effective use of his network of experts. And, most importantly of all, as mentioned above, I did not have to pay for re-work or uneconomical communications because Paul characteristically got things right the first time. Litigation is painfully expensive but I was always happy when I paid Paul. Money well spent. I am also happy to recommend his services to you. Please be assured that it is in your interest to consider this fine lawyer for your own needs.

My only experience with Paul so far has been the initial answer to my question. However, based upon the clear, concise information that he provided I am absolutely positive that I will use his services if I decide that I want to continue this matter. Paul’s written response pointed me to the section of the contract that I needed to examine. Paul also followed up with a phone call. He was courteous, knowledgeable and a completely enjoyable person to talk to. Using the information he provided, I was able to finally determine that I am up the creek without the proverbial paddle.

Paul is an awesome business attorney. Even in the confusing world of California ABC law, he's helped up understand the best ways to reach our goals while navigating the convoluted rules and regulations. And his attention to detail has saved us more than once when dealing with everything from our business contracts to our insurance coverage.

Paul helped me with a mediation involving a dispute with a contractor who, according to my estimation, overcharged me by over $100K. Paul drew up a mediation brief that provided a compelling case for a refund from the contractor. He also advised me when the contractor threatened to sue me for libel regarding honest online reviews i posted detailing the experience with the contractor; the contractor did not follow through with the threat to sue. Paul is a very personable professional who gives his best effort to help resolve problems and is a pleasure to work with.

Paul does a great job of follow up which I have found to be if not lacking at least tardy with many other attorneys. We feel to be a priority for him.

I was named as the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit resulting from a collision between a female pedestrian and myself as I was riding a bicycle. Paul Schroeder represented me in this matter over 14 months of litigation resulting in an eventual settlement. My choice of this attorney was one of the best moves I have ever made in my life. Paul’s performance as a litigator was superb. If I were to recount every example of the ways in which he out-lawyered the opposing counsel this letter would be too long. I will recount one. Early in my case Paul deposed a witness. His first questions to the witness puzzled me. They did not seem relevant. Later on in the deposition, when the plaintiff’s lawyer started asking speculative questions to the witness I realized that Paul had anticipated what kinds of questions his opponent would ask, and the kinds of opinionated answers that the witness might offer. The witness’ answers to Paul’s earlier “irrelevant” questions were now on the record and would either serve to keep the witness’ later answers consistent with his earlier answers, or would serve to trap the witness into a contradiction if his later answers were contrary or hypocritical. This was brilliant lawyering. Over time I came to appreciate that Paul knows what he knows and he knows what he doesn’t know. He has built a fine network of advisors and experts to brief him on subjects of relevance and he also performs his own very effective research whenever needed. My written and oral conversations with Paul were very productive, economical and effective. Never once did he and I have to spend any valuable time clearing up any misunderstandings or re-establishing any previous understanding or making substantial revisions to any legal document drafts. I am still astonished by how well Paul always grasped whatever thoughts or details I shared with him, always getting it right and complete the first time. I was an engaged and energetic client. Paul always treated my opinions with respect and made use of them when they were useful. He is a master of “pre-suasion”, guiding his listener to come to the wisest conclusions on his own rather than having to hear it first from Paul’s mouth. He served as a cool, level-headed, calm counterweight to my competitiveness and eagerness. Yet I have no doubt that he can inject some heat into a timid, cautious client’s thinking when it is in his client’s interest. Paul of course was aware that I had to defend myself at my own expense. I will be forever grateful to him for a number of ways in which he was considerate of my financial situation and delivered exceptional value. For instance, Paul found a no-cost venue for a mediation session. He also made resourceful and cost-effective use of his network of experts. And, most importantly of all, as mentioned above, I did not have to pay for re-work or uneconomical communications because Paul characteristically got things right the first time. Litigation is painfully expensive but I was always happy when I paid Paul. Money well spent. I am also happy to recommend his services to you. Please be assured that it is in your interest to consider this fine lawyer for your own needs.

My only experience with Paul so far has been the initial answer to my question. However, based upon the clear, concise information that he provided I am absolutely positive that I will use his services if I decide that I want to continue this matter. Paul’s written response pointed me to the section of the contract that I needed to examine. Paul also followed up with a phone call. He was courteous, knowledgeable and a completely enjoyable person to talk to. Using the information he provided, I was able to finally determine that I am up the creek without the proverbial paddle.

Paul is an awesome business attorney. Even in the confusing world of California ABC law, he's helped up understand the best ways to reach our goals while navigating the convoluted rules and regulations. And his attention to detail has saved us more than once when dealing with everything from our business contracts to our insurance coverage.

Paul helped me with a mediation involving a dispute with a contractor who, according to my estimation, overcharged me by over $100K. Paul drew up a mediation brief that provided a compelling case for a refund from the contractor. He also advised me when the contractor threatened to sue me for libel regarding honest online reviews i posted detailing the experience with the contractor; the contractor did not follow through with the threat to sue. Paul is a very personable professional who gives his best effort to help resolve problems and is a pleasure to work with.

Paul does a great job of follow up which I have found to be if not lacking at least tardy with many other attorneys. We feel to be a priority for him.

I was named as the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit resulting from a collision between a female pedestrian and myself as I was riding a bicycle. Paul Schroeder represented me in this matter over 14 months of litigation resulting in an eventual settlement. My choice of this attorney was one of the best moves I have ever made in my life. Paul’s performance as a litigator was superb. If I were to recount every example of the ways in which he out-lawyered the opposing counsel this letter would be too long. I will recount one. Early in my case Paul deposed a witness. His first questions to the witness puzzled me. They did not seem relevant. Later on in the deposition, when the plaintiff’s lawyer started asking speculative questions to the witness I realized that Paul had anticipated what kinds of questions his opponent would ask, and the kinds of opinionated answers that the witness might offer. The witness’ answers to Paul’s earlier “irrelevant” questions were now on the record and would either serve to keep the witness’ later answers consistent with his earlier answers, or would serve to trap the witness into a contradiction if his later answers were contrary or hypocritical. This was brilliant lawyering. Over time I came to appreciate that Paul knows what he knows and he knows what he doesn’t know. He has built a fine network of advisors and experts to brief him on subjects of relevance and he also performs his own very effective research whenever needed. My written and oral conversations with Paul were very productive, economical and effective. Never once did he and I have to spend any valuable time clearing up any misunderstandings or re-establishing any previous understanding or making substantial revisions to any legal document drafts. I am still astonished by how well Paul always grasped whatever thoughts or details I shared with him, always getting it right and complete the first time. I was an engaged and energetic client. Paul always treated my opinions with respect and made use of them when they were useful. He is a master of “pre-suasion”, guiding his listener to come to the wisest conclusions on his own rather than having to hear it first from Paul’s mouth. He served as a cool, level-headed, calm counterweight to my competitiveness and eagerness. Yet I have no doubt that he can inject some heat into a timid, cautious client’s thinking when it is in his client’s interest. Paul of course was aware that I had to defend myself at my own expense. I will be forever grateful to him for a number of ways in which he was considerate of my financial situation and delivered exceptional value. For instance, Paul found a no-cost venue for a mediation session. He also made resourceful and cost-effective use of his network of experts. And, most importantly of all, as mentioned above, I did not have to pay for re-work or uneconomical communications because Paul characteristically got things right the first time. Litigation is painfully expensive but I was always happy when I paid Paul. Money well spent. I am also happy to recommend his services to you. Please be assured that it is in your interest to consider this fine lawyer for your own needs.

My only experience with Paul so far has been the initial answer to my question. However, based upon the clear, concise information that he provided I am absolutely positive that I will use his services if I decide that I want to continue this matter. Paul’s written response pointed me to the section of the contract that I needed to examine. Paul also followed up with a phone call. He was courteous, knowledgeable and a completely enjoyable person to talk to. Using the information he provided, I was able to finally determine that I am up the creek without the proverbial paddle.

Paul is an awesome business attorney. Even in the confusing world of California ABC law, he's helped up understand the best ways to reach our goals while navigating the convoluted rules and regulations. And his attention to detail has saved us more than once when dealing with everything from our business contracts to our insurance coverage.

Paul helped me with a mediation involving a dispute with a contractor who, according to my estimation, overcharged me by over $100K. Paul drew up a mediation brief that provided a compelling case for a refund from the contractor. He also advised me when the contractor threatened to sue me for libel regarding honest online reviews i posted detailing the experience with the contractor; the contractor did not follow through with the threat to sue. Paul is a very personable professional who gives his best effort to help resolve problems and is a pleasure to work with.

Paul does a great job of follow up which I have found to be if not lacking at least tardy with many other attorneys. We feel to be a priority for him.

I was named as the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit resulting from a collision between a female pedestrian and myself as I was riding a bicycle. Paul Schroeder represented me in this matter over 14 months of litigation resulting in an eventual settlement. My choice of this attorney was one of the best moves I have ever made in my life. Paul’s performance as a litigator was superb. If I were to recount every example of the ways in which he out-lawyered the opposing counsel this letter would be too long. I will recount one. Early in my case Paul deposed a witness. His first questions to the witness puzzled me. They did not seem relevant. Later on in the deposition, when the plaintiff’s lawyer started asking speculative questions to the witness I realized that Paul had anticipated what kinds of questions his opponent would ask, and the kinds of opinionated answers that the witness might offer. The witness’ answers to Paul’s earlier “irrelevant” questions were now on the record and would either serve to keep the witness’ later answers consistent with his earlier answers, or would serve to trap the witness into a contradiction if his later answers were contrary or hypocritical. This was brilliant lawyering. Over time I came to appreciate that Paul knows what he knows and he knows what he doesn’t know. He has built a fine network of advisors and experts to brief him on subjects of relevance and he also performs his own very effective research whenever needed. My written and oral conversations with Paul were very productive, economical and effective. Never once did he and I have to spend any valuable time clearing up any misunderstandings or re-establishing any previous understanding or making substantial revisions to any legal document drafts. I am still astonished by how well Paul always grasped whatever thoughts or details I shared with him, always getting it right and complete the first time. I was an engaged and energetic client. Paul always treated my opinions with respect and made use of them when they were useful. He is a master of “pre-suasion”, guiding his listener to come to the wisest conclusions on his own rather than having to hear it first from Paul’s mouth. He served as a cool, level-headed, calm counterweight to my competitiveness and eagerness. Yet I have no doubt that he can inject some heat into a timid, cautious client’s thinking when it is in his client’s interest. Paul of course was aware that I had to defend myself at my own expense. I will be forever grateful to him for a number of ways in which he was considerate of my financial situation and delivered exceptional value. For instance, Paul found a no-cost venue for a mediation session. He also made resourceful and cost-effective use of his network of experts. And, most importantly of all, as mentioned above, I did not have to pay for re-work or uneconomical communications because Paul characteristically got things right the first time. Litigation is painfully expensive but I was always happy when I paid Paul. Money well spent. I am also happy to recommend his services to you. Please be assured that it is in your interest to consider this fine lawyer for your own needs.

My only experience with Paul so far has been the initial answer to my question. However, based upon the clear, concise information that he provided I am absolutely positive that I will use his services if I decide that I want to continue this matter. Paul’s written response pointed me to the section of the contract that I needed to examine. Paul also followed up with a phone call. He was courteous, knowledgeable and a completely enjoyable person to talk to. Using the information he provided, I was able to finally determine that I am up the creek without the proverbial paddle.

Paul is an awesome business attorney. Even in the confusing world of California ABC law, he's helped up understand the best ways to reach our goals while navigating the convoluted rules and regulations. And his attention to detail has saved us more than once when dealing with everything from our business contracts to our insurance coverage.

Paul helped me with a mediation involving a dispute with a contractor who, according to my estimation, overcharged me by over $100K. Paul drew up a mediation brief that provided a compelling case for a refund from the contractor. He also advised me when the contractor threatened to sue me for libel regarding honest online reviews i posted detailing the experience with the contractor; the contractor did not follow through with the threat to sue. Paul is a very personable professional who gives his best effort to help resolve problems and is a pleasure to work with.

Paul does a great job of follow up which I have found to be if not lacking at least tardy with many other attorneys. We feel to be a priority for him.

I was named as the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit resulting from a collision between a female pedestrian and myself as I was riding a bicycle. Paul Schroeder represented me in this matter over 14 months of litigation resulting in an eventual settlement. My choice of this attorney was one of the best moves I have ever made in my life. Paul’s performance as a litigator was superb. If I were to recount every example of the ways in which he out-lawyered the opposing counsel this letter would be too long. I will recount one. Early in my case Paul deposed a witness. His first questions to the witness puzzled me. They did not seem relevant. Later on in the deposition, when the plaintiff’s lawyer started asking speculative questions to the witness I realized that Paul had anticipated what kinds of questions his opponent would ask, and the kinds of opinionated answers that the witness might offer. The witness’ answers to Paul’s earlier “irrelevant” questions were now on the record and would either serve to keep the witness’ later answers consistent with his earlier answers, or would serve to trap the witness into a contradiction if his later answers were contrary or hypocritical. This was brilliant lawyering. Over time I came to appreciate that Paul knows what he knows and he knows what he doesn’t know. He has built a fine network of advisors and experts to brief him on subjects of relevance and he also performs his own very effective research whenever needed. My written and oral conversations with Paul were very productive, economical and effective. Never once did he and I have to spend any valuable time clearing up any misunderstandings or re-establishing any previous understanding or making substantial revisions to any legal document drafts. I am still astonished by how well Paul always grasped whatever thoughts or details I shared with him, always getting it right and complete the first time. I was an engaged and energetic client. Paul always treated my opinions with respect and made use of them when they were useful. He is a master of “pre-suasion”, guiding his listener to come to the wisest conclusions on his own rather than having to hear it first from Paul’s mouth. He served as a cool, level-headed, calm counterweight to my competitiveness and eagerness. Yet I have no doubt that he can inject some heat into a timid, cautious client’s thinking when it is in his client’s interest. Paul of course was aware that I had to defend myself at my own expense. I will be forever grateful to him for a number of ways in which he was considerate of my financial situation and delivered exceptional value. For instance, Paul found a no-cost venue for a mediation session. He also made resourceful and cost-effective use of his network of experts. And, most importantly of all, as mentioned above, I did not have to pay for re-work or uneconomical communications because Paul characteristically got things right the first time. Litigation is painfully expensive but I was always happy when I paid Paul. Money well spent. I am also happy to recommend his services to you. Please be assured that it is in your interest to consider this fine lawyer for your own needs.

My only experience with Paul so far has been the initial answer to my question. However, based upon the clear, concise information that he provided I am absolutely positive that I will use his services if I decide that I want to continue this matter. Paul’s written response pointed me to the section of the contract that I needed to examine. Paul also followed up with a phone call. He was courteous, knowledgeable and a completely enjoyable person to talk to. Using the information he provided, I was able to finally determine that I am up the creek without the proverbial paddle.

Paul is an awesome business attorney. Even in the confusing world of California ABC law, he's helped up understand the best ways to reach our goals while navigating the convoluted rules and regulations. And his attention to detail has saved us more than once when dealing with everything from our business contracts to our insurance coverage.

Paul helped me with a mediation involving a dispute with a contractor who, according to my estimation, overcharged me by over $100K. Paul drew up a mediation brief that provided a compelling case for a refund from the contractor. He also advised me when the contractor threatened to sue me for libel regarding honest online reviews i posted detailing the experience with the contractor; the contractor did not follow through with the threat to sue. Paul is a very personable professional who gives his best effort to help resolve problems and is a pleasure to work with.

Paul does a great job of follow up which I have found to be if not lacking at least tardy with many other attorneys. We feel to be a priority for him.

I was named as the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit resulting from a collision between a female pedestrian and myself as I was riding a bicycle. Paul Schroeder represented me in this matter over 14 months of litigation resulting in an eventual settlement. My choice of this attorney was one of the best moves I have ever made in my life. Paul’s performance as a litigator was superb. If I were to recount every example of the ways in which he out-lawyered the opposing counsel this letter would be too long. I will recount one. Early in my case Paul deposed a witness. His first questions to the witness puzzled me. They did not seem relevant. Later on in the deposition, when the plaintiff’s lawyer started asking speculative questions to the witness I realized that Paul had anticipated what kinds of questions his opponent would ask, and the kinds of opinionated answers that the witness might offer. The witness’ answers to Paul’s earlier “irrelevant” questions were now on the record and would either serve to keep the witness’ later answers consistent with his earlier answers, or would serve to trap the witness into a contradiction if his later answers were contrary or hypocritical. This was brilliant lawyering. Over time I came to appreciate that Paul knows what he knows and he knows what he doesn’t know. He has built a fine network of advisors and experts to brief him on subjects of relevance and he also performs his own very effective research whenever needed. My written and oral conversations with Paul were very productive, economical and effective. Never once did he and I have to spend any valuable time clearing up any misunderstandings or re-establishing any previous understanding or making substantial revisions to any legal document drafts. I am still astonished by how well Paul always grasped whatever thoughts or details I shared with him, always getting it right and complete the first time. I was an engaged and energetic client. Paul always treated my opinions with respect and made use of them when they were useful. He is a master of “pre-suasion”, guiding his listener to come to the wisest conclusions on his own rather than having to hear it first from Paul’s mouth. He served as a cool, level-headed, calm counterweight to my competitiveness and eagerness. Yet I have no doubt that he can inject some heat into a timid, cautious client’s thinking when it is in his client’s interest. Paul of course was aware that I had to defend myself at my own expense. I will be forever grateful to him for a number of ways in which he was considerate of my financial situation and delivered exceptional value. For instance, Paul found a no-cost venue for a mediation session. He also made resourceful and cost-effective use of his network of experts. And, most importantly of all, as mentioned above, I did not have to pay for re-work or uneconomical communications because Paul characteristically got things right the first time. Litigation is painfully expensive but I was always happy when I paid Paul. Money well spent. I am also happy to recommend his services to you. Please be assured that it is in your interest to consider this fine lawyer for your own needs.

My only experience with Paul so far has been the initial answer to my question. However, based upon the clear, concise information that he provided I am absolutely positive that I will use his services if I decide that I want to continue this matter. Paul’s written response pointed me to the section of the contract that I needed to examine. Paul also followed up with a phone call. He was courteous, knowledgeable and a completely enjoyable person to talk to. Using the information he provided, I was able to finally determine that I am up the creek without the proverbial paddle.

Paul is an awesome business attorney. Even in the confusing world of California ABC law, he's helped up understand the best ways to reach our goals while navigating the convoluted rules and regulations. And his attention to detail has saved us more than once when dealing with everything from our business contracts to our insurance coverage.

Paul helped me with a mediation involving a dispute with a contractor who, according to my estimation, overcharged me by over $100K. Paul drew up a mediation brief that provided a compelling case for a refund from the contractor. He also advised me when the contractor threatened to sue me for libel regarding honest online reviews i posted detailing the experience with the contractor; the contractor did not follow through with the threat to sue. Paul is a very personable professional who gives his best effort to help resolve problems and is a pleasure to work with.

Paul does a great job of follow up which I have found to be if not lacking at least tardy with many other attorneys. We feel to be a priority for him.

I was named as the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit resulting from a collision between a female pedestrian and myself as I was riding a bicycle. Paul Schroeder represented me in this matter over 14 months of litigation resulting in an eventual settlement. My choice of this attorney was one of the best moves I have ever made in my life. Paul’s performance as a litigator was superb. If I were to recount every example of the ways in which he out-lawyered the opposing counsel this letter would be too long. I will recount one. Early in my case Paul deposed a witness. His first questions to the witness puzzled me. They did not seem relevant. Later on in the deposition, when the plaintiff’s lawyer started asking speculative questions to the witness I realized that Paul had anticipated what kinds of questions his opponent would ask, and the kinds of opinionated answers that the witness might offer. The witness’ answers to Paul’s earlier “irrelevant” questions were now on the record and would either serve to keep the witness’ later answers consistent with his earlier answers, or would serve to trap the witness into a contradiction if his later answers were contrary or hypocritical. This was brilliant lawyering. Over time I came to appreciate that Paul knows what he knows and he knows what he doesn’t know. He has built a fine network of advisors and experts to brief him on subjects of relevance and he also performs his own very effective research whenever needed. My written and oral conversations with Paul were very productive, economical and effective. Never once did he and I have to spend any valuable time clearing up any misunderstandings or re-establishing any previous understanding or making substantial revisions to any legal document drafts. I am still astonished by how well Paul always grasped whatever thoughts or details I shared with him, always getting it right and complete the first time. I was an engaged and energetic client. Paul always treated my opinions with respect and made use of them when they were useful. He is a master of “pre-suasion”, guiding his listener to come to the wisest conclusions on his own rather than having to hear it first from Paul’s mouth. He served as a cool, level-headed, calm counterweight to my competitiveness and eagerness. Yet I have no doubt that he can inject some heat into a timid, cautious client’s thinking when it is in his client’s interest. Paul of course was aware that I had to defend myself at my own expense. I will be forever grateful to him for a number of ways in which he was considerate of my financial situation and delivered exceptional value. For instance, Paul found a no-cost venue for a mediation session. He also made resourceful and cost-effective use of his network of experts. And, most importantly of all, as mentioned above, I did not have to pay for re-work or uneconomical communications because Paul characteristically got things right the first time. Litigation is painfully expensive but I was always happy when I paid Paul. Money well spent. I am also happy to recommend his services to you. Please be assured that it is in your interest to consider this fine lawyer for your own needs.

My only experience with Paul so far has been the initial answer to my question. However, based upon the clear, concise information that he provided I am absolutely positive that I will use his services if I decide that I want to continue this matter. Paul’s written response pointed me to the section of the contract that I needed to examine. Paul also followed up with a phone call. He was courteous, knowledgeable and a completely enjoyable person to talk to. Using the information he provided, I was able to finally determine that I am up the creek without the proverbial paddle.

Paul is an awesome business attorney. Even in the confusing world of California ABC law, he's helped up understand the best ways to reach our goals while navigating the convoluted rules and regulations. And his attention to detail has saved us more than once when dealing with everything from our business contracts to our insurance coverage.

Paul helped me with a mediation involving a dispute with a contractor who, according to my estimation, overcharged me by over $100K. Paul drew up a mediation brief that provided a compelling case for a refund from the contractor. He also advised me when the contractor threatened to sue me for libel regarding honest online reviews i posted detailing the experience with the contractor; the contractor did not follow through with the threat to sue. Paul is a very personable professional who gives his best effort to help resolve problems and is a pleasure to work with.

Paul does a great job of follow up which I have found to be if not lacking at least tardy with many other attorneys. We feel to be a priority for him.

I was named as the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit resulting from a collision between a female pedestrian and myself as I was riding a bicycle. Paul Schroeder represented me in this matter over 14 months of litigation resulting in an eventual settlement. My choice of this attorney was one of the best moves I have ever made in my life. Paul’s performance as a litigator was superb. If I were to recount every example of the ways in which he out-lawyered the opposing counsel this letter would be too long. I will recount one. Early in my case Paul deposed a witness. His first questions to the witness puzzled me. They did not seem relevant. Later on in the deposition, when the plaintiff’s lawyer started asking speculative questions to the witness I realized that Paul had anticipated what kinds of questions his opponent would ask, and the kinds of opinionated answers that the witness might offer. The witness’ answers to Paul’s earlier “irrelevant” questions were now on the record and would either serve to keep the witness’ later answers consistent with his earlier answers, or would serve to trap the witness into a contradiction if his later answers were contrary or hypocritical. This was brilliant lawyering. Over time I came to appreciate that Paul knows what he knows and he knows what he doesn’t know. He has built a fine network of advisors and experts to brief him on subjects of relevance and he also performs his own very effective research whenever needed. My written and oral conversations with Paul were very productive, economical and effective. Never once did he and I have to spend any valuable time clearing up any misunderstandings or re-establishing any previous understanding or making substantial revisions to any legal document drafts. I am still astonished by how well Paul always grasped whatever thoughts or details I shared with him, always getting it right and complete the first time. I was an engaged and energetic client. Paul always treated my opinions with respect and made use of them when they were useful. He is a master of “pre-suasion”, guiding his listener to come to the wisest conclusions on his own rather than having to hear it first from Paul’s mouth. He served as a cool, level-headed, calm counterweight to my competitiveness and eagerness. Yet I have no doubt that he can inject some heat into a timid, cautious client’s thinking when it is in his client’s interest. Paul of course was aware that I had to defend myself at my own expense. I will be forever grateful to him for a number of ways in which he was considerate of my financial situation and delivered exceptional value. For instance, Paul found a no-cost venue for a mediation session. He also made resourceful and cost-effective use of his network of experts. And, most importantly of all, as mentioned above, I did not have to pay for re-work or uneconomical communications because Paul characteristically got things right the first time. Litigation is painfully expensive but I was always happy when I paid Paul. Money well spent. I am also happy to recommend his services to you. Please be assured that it is in your interest to consider this fine lawyer for your own needs.

My only experience with Paul so far has been the initial answer to my question. However, based upon the clear, concise information that he provided I am absolutely positive that I will use his services if I decide that I want to continue this matter. Paul’s written response pointed me to the section of the contract that I needed to examine. Paul also followed up with a phone call. He was courteous, knowledgeable and a completely enjoyable person to talk to. Using the information he provided, I was able to finally determine that I am up the creek without the proverbial paddle.

Paul is an awesome business attorney. Even in the confusing world of California ABC law, he's helped up understand the best ways to reach our goals while navigating the convoluted rules and regulations. And his attention to detail has saved us more than once when dealing with everything from our business contracts to our insurance coverage.

Paul helped me with a mediation involving a dispute with a contractor who, according to my estimation, overcharged me by over $100K. Paul drew up a mediation brief that provided a compelling case for a refund from the contractor. He also advised me when the contractor threatened to sue me for libel regarding honest online reviews i posted detailing the experience with the contractor; the contractor did not follow through with the threat to sue. Paul is a very personable professional who gives his best effort to help resolve problems and is a pleasure to work with.

Paul does a great job of follow up which I have found to be if not lacking at least tardy with many other attorneys. We feel to be a priority for him.

I was named as the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit resulting from a collision between a female pedestrian and myself as I was riding a bicycle. Paul Schroeder represented me in this matter over 14 months of litigation resulting in an eventual settlement. My choice of this attorney was one of the best moves I have ever made in my life. Paul’s performance as a litigator was superb. If I were to recount every example of the ways in which he out-lawyered the opposing counsel this letter would be too long. I will recount one. Early in my case Paul deposed a witness. His first questions to the witness puzzled me. They did not seem relevant. Later on in the deposition, when the plaintiff’s lawyer started asking speculative questions to the witness I realized that Paul had anticipated what kinds of questions his opponent would ask, and the kinds of opinionated answers that the witness might offer. The witness’ answers to Paul’s earlier “irrelevant” questions were now on the record and would either serve to keep the witness’ later answers consistent with his earlier answers, or would serve to trap the witness into a contradiction if his later answers were contrary or hypocritical. This was brilliant lawyering. Over time I came to appreciate that Paul knows what he knows and he knows what he doesn’t know. He has built a fine network of advisors and experts to brief him on subjects of relevance and he also performs his own very effective research whenever needed. My written and oral conversations with Paul were very productive, economical and effective. Never once did he and I have to spend any valuable time clearing up any misunderstandings or re-establishing any previous understanding or making substantial revisions to any legal document drafts. I am still astonished by how well Paul always grasped whatever thoughts or details I shared with him, always getting it right and complete the first time. I was an engaged and energetic client. Paul always treated my opinions with respect and made use of them when they were useful. He is a master of “pre-suasion”, guiding his listener to come to the wisest conclusions on his own rather than having to hear it first from Paul’s mouth. He served as a cool, level-headed, calm counterweight to my competitiveness and eagerness. Yet I have no doubt that he can inject some heat into a timid, cautious client’s thinking when it is in his client’s interest. Paul of course was aware that I had to defend myself at my own expense. I will be forever grateful to him for a number of ways in which he was considerate of my financial situation and delivered exceptional value. For instance, Paul found a no-cost venue for a mediation session. He also made resourceful and cost-effective use of his network of experts. And, most importantly of all, as mentioned above, I did not have to pay for re-work or uneconomical communications because Paul characteristically got things right the first time. Litigation is painfully expensive but I was always happy when I paid Paul. Money well spent. I am also happy to recommend his services to you. Please be assured that it is in your interest to consider this fine lawyer for your own needs.

My only experience with Paul so far has been the initial answer to my question. However, based upon the clear, concise information that he provided I am absolutely positive that I will use his services if I decide that I want to continue this matter. Paul’s written response pointed me to the section of the contract that I needed to examine. Paul also followed up with a phone call. He was courteous, knowledgeable and a completely enjoyable person to talk to. Using the information he provided, I was able to finally determine that I am up the creek without the proverbial paddle.

Paul is an awesome business attorney. Even in the confusing world of California ABC law, he's helped up understand the best ways to reach our goals while navigating the convoluted rules and regulations. And his attention to detail has saved us more than once when dealing with everything from our business contracts to our insurance coverage.

Paul helped me with a mediation involving a dispute with a contractor who, according to my estimation, overcharged me by over $100K. Paul drew up a mediation brief that provided a compelling case for a refund from the contractor. He also advised me when the contractor threatened to sue me for libel regarding honest online reviews i posted detailing the experience with the contractor; the contractor did not follow through with the threat to sue. Paul is a very personable professional who gives his best effort to help resolve problems and is a pleasure to work with.

Paul does a great job of follow up which I have found to be if not lacking at least tardy with many other attorneys. We feel to be a priority for him.