Appearance Attorneys BANNED In SDTx (Bohm) cases [1 Attachment]
Posted: Thu Jul 18, 2013 9:32 pm
Cdcbaa:
The facts in the case Mr. Fleischman refers are pretty bad, but realize the State Bar of California has made a finding that fees can be less expensive if attorneys are allowed to use appearance attorneys. Jay hasn't been here that long, so he probably doesn't know that the State Bar has made such a finding and approved using appearance attorneys. I would not worry about a Texas opinion based on such egregious facts being imported to California, when our bar association has approved appearance attorneys.
d
Sent from my iPad
On Jul 17, 2013, at 1:50 PM, Jay Fleischman wrote:
> [Attachment(s) from Jay Fleischman included below]
> Courtesy of Pamela L. Stewart, a NACBA Director who practices in
> Houston, comes this 92 page opinion that blows the doors off a large
> filer's practices of using appearance attorneys.
>
> The decision is scathing, but a useful roadmap of how NOT to run a
> firm. Not necessarily an indictment of using appearance counsel per
> se, and I think the Judge went a wee bit overboard here.
>
> -------------
> Jay S. Fleischman, Esq.
> Shaev & Fleischman, LLP
>
> I help people in the Los Angeles area and New York City get smart
> solutions to their bill problems.
>
> http://www.ConsumerHelpCentral.com
>
> 556 S Fair Oaks Ave Ste 101-152
> Pasadena CA 91105-2656
>
> 350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 7210
> New York NY 10118
>
> T: 626-808-4343 x704
> E: jay@sflawca.com
>
> Email isn't secure, so it's not confidential. By communicating with
> me by email, you understand that it's not confidential.
>
The post was migrated from Yahoo.