I used Phil Brown in my custody case. Prior to litigation, Phil advised me that it was perfectly OK for me to take my infant and relocate out of state to avoid my abusive ex. As it turns out that advice was not 100% correct. It colored my case negatively before it even began. He was very good in the Child Support arena, however, and was able to get my child's need met based on actual need and not on the income of the dead-beat father.

Based on my negative, crappy experience - and speaking for myself - I could not in good conscience personally recommend this divorce lawyer, his colleague Saul, or the legal practice to anyone. If we pay lawyers for legal services rendered, then they should properly and diligently advise their clients. The lawyer probably received a lot more compensation than for what he deserved. 20-20 hindsight indeed. It's the principle of it. As clients we don't expect incompetence. We hire attorneys for help and "due diligence!" We don't hire lawyers to be "dead weight" and unresponsive. At the time of the divorce processing there were some "oversights" and "neglected responsibilities" that I feel the law firm should have been more on top of. Why is this bothering me, you might be thinking? Because I feel the divorce lawyer and his support staff have not properly and professionally served this client. Are three generations of successful legal experience worthless? Apparently so! The firm does not handle your case with a personal touch.

He has no sense of responsibility. I could not reach him for weeks when I needed him for discussion on time sensitive materials. More important, he never informed me about such deadlines until I found out on my own research. He is not knowledgeable. He has no idea about some very simple laws/acts that explanations on these can be found on Internet easily. Sometimes, I had to make decision on rejecting some unreasonable requests/demands from the opposing lawyer based on common sense while he was trying to accept. He is lack of abilities—a simple agreement (about half page) took him hours to draft and it was full of mistakes. I had to review and modify myself, then he would just copy and paste. He tried to persuade me into a settlement when he could not strike back some preposterous accusations from the opposing lawyer without listening to me. In short, he is the most crappy lawyer i have ever hired.

I used Phil Brown in my custody case. Prior to litigation, Phil advised me that it was perfectly OK for me to take my infant and relocate out of state to avoid my abusive ex. As it turns out that advice was not 100% correct. It colored my case negatively before it even began. He was very good in the Child Support arena, however, and was able to get my child's need met based on actual need and not on the income of the dead-beat father.

Based on my negative, crappy experience - and speaking for myself - I could not in good conscience personally recommend this divorce lawyer, his colleague Saul, or the legal practice to anyone. If we pay lawyers for legal services rendered, then they should properly and diligently advise their clients. The lawyer probably received a lot more compensation than for what he deserved. 20-20 hindsight indeed. It's the principle of it. As clients we don't expect incompetence. We hire attorneys for help and "due diligence!" We don't hire lawyers to be "dead weight" and unresponsive. At the time of the divorce processing there were some "oversights" and "neglected responsibilities" that I feel the law firm should have been more on top of. Why is this bothering me, you might be thinking? Because I feel the divorce lawyer and his support staff have not properly and professionally served this client. Are three generations of successful legal experience worthless? Apparently so! The firm does not handle your case with a personal touch.

He has no sense of responsibility. I could not reach him for weeks when I needed him for discussion on time sensitive materials. More important, he never informed me about such deadlines until I found out on my own research. He is not knowledgeable. He has no idea about some very simple laws/acts that explanations on these can be found on Internet easily. Sometimes, I had to make decision on rejecting some unreasonable requests/demands from the opposing lawyer based on common sense while he was trying to accept. He is lack of abilities—a simple agreement (about half page) took him hours to draft and it was full of mistakes. I had to review and modify myself, then he would just copy and paste. He tried to persuade me into a settlement when he could not strike back some preposterous accusations from the opposing lawyer without listening to me. In short, he is the most crappy lawyer i have ever hired.

I used Phil Brown in my custody case. Prior to litigation, Phil advised me that it was perfectly OK for me to take my infant and relocate out of state to avoid my abusive ex. As it turns out that advice was not 100% correct. It colored my case negatively before it even began. He was very good in the Child Support arena, however, and was able to get my child's need met based on actual need and not on the income of the dead-beat father.

Based on my negative, crappy experience - and speaking for myself - I could not in good conscience personally recommend this divorce lawyer, his colleague Saul, or the legal practice to anyone. If we pay lawyers for legal services rendered, then they should properly and diligently advise their clients. The lawyer probably received a lot more compensation than for what he deserved. 20-20 hindsight indeed. It's the principle of it. As clients we don't expect incompetence. We hire attorneys for help and "due diligence!" We don't hire lawyers to be "dead weight" and unresponsive. At the time of the divorce processing there were some "oversights" and "neglected responsibilities" that I feel the law firm should have been more on top of. Why is this bothering me, you might be thinking? Because I feel the divorce lawyer and his support staff have not properly and professionally served this client. Are three generations of successful legal experience worthless? Apparently so! The firm does not handle your case with a personal touch.

He has no sense of responsibility. I could not reach him for weeks when I needed him for discussion on time sensitive materials. More important, he never informed me about such deadlines until I found out on my own research. He is not knowledgeable. He has no idea about some very simple laws/acts that explanations on these can be found on Internet easily. Sometimes, I had to make decision on rejecting some unreasonable requests/demands from the opposing lawyer based on common sense while he was trying to accept. He is lack of abilities—a simple agreement (about half page) took him hours to draft and it was full of mistakes. I had to review and modify myself, then he would just copy and paste. He tried to persuade me into a settlement when he could not strike back some preposterous accusations from the opposing lawyer without listening to me. In short, he is the most crappy lawyer i have ever hired.