• Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

The heavily advertised Pacific Law Center was once San Diego’s best-known law firm, but its most controversial. Two years ago, Kerry Steigerwalt, a criminal lawyer who is regularly quoted on local television, gained control of the firm and changed its name to Kerry Steigerwalt’s Pacific Law Center. It became a household name.

In a deposition for a lawsuit filed against the center last year, Steigerwalt claimed that the firm’s previous owners had wooed him and fed him false information. He said he was the “fall guy.”

Steigerwalt has indeed fallen. The firm, which specializes in driving-under-the-influence, personal injury, and defective-product cases, while purportedly counseling those with financial woes, intends to take no new cases but will wrap up old ones and eventually close down. Just recently, the Yellow Book sued the firm, saying it hasn’t paid for more than $200,000 in advertising. UTC Properties has also sued, saying the firm hasn’t paid rent at its posh La Jolla suite since the beginning of the year and owes almost $200,000.

Tom Slattery, a former lawyer at the firm, filed a massive complaint about its practices with the California State Bar, sending copies to state officials including the attorney general’s office. Some current and former lawyers say that the bar is probing the matter, but the bar won’t confirm that. Last week, Slattery filed suit against the firm, claiming that early this year, Steigerwalt’s firm was trying to stave off an “imminent collapse.”

The law firm has a D+ rating with the Better Business Bureau, generating 79 complaints in three years. That D+ is a slight improvement on an earlier F rating. Since 2004, there have been more than 40 superior court suits filed against the firm under both its names.

Steigerwalt blames most of his problems on the weak economy forcing criminal defendants to go to public defenders. But the inescapable truth is that he didn’t do his homework when taking over Pacific Law Center. On June 30, a new law firm registered with the secretary of state: Steigerwalt Law Firm, APC.

One key suit was filed in 2008 by Carl Hancock, who worked for Pacific Law Center for only nine months. The suit charged that Steigerwalt’s entrance into the firm was a “sham sales transaction for the purpose of protecting the assets” of the firm’s founders, Larry Majors, his son Austin Majors, and son-in-law Jeffrey Phillips, a Phoenix attorney. Hancock settled the suit early this year.

Another suit was filed last year by Dagoberto Llamas, who alleged he was blatantly cheated by the firm, which took big bucks from him to handle a criminal case in which he was charged with driving under the influence, battery, hit and run, and contempt of court. He was initially assured he could win the case but subsequently told it was hopeless. Llamas’s case against the law firm was handled by well-known criminal attorney Michael Pancer, his son Ian, and Doug Gilliland.

The suit says that the business model of both Kerry Steigerwalt’s Pacific Law Center and its predecessor “is the brainchild of a convicted felon and car dealer from Arizona named Larry Majors. After serving time for fraud in Arizona, Majors, a non-lawyer, opened a law firm in San Antonio, Texas, using a down-on-his-luck lawyer.… Majors launched a massive television advertising campaign to attract clients.” But Majors fled Texas after a bankruptcy judge called the firm “a borderline criminal enterprise.”

Then, according to the Pancer team’s account, Majors set up shop in San Diego with a lawyer who was eventually disbarred. Majors vamoosed when Texas authorities charged him with absconding with clients’ money. In 1993, Pacific Law Center opened in San Diego with son Austin Majors as executive director. The office was in La Jolla, but the listed address was that of son-in-law Jeffrey Phillips’s Phoenix law firm.

There has always been controversy about who owned and ran Pacific Law Center. According to Slattery’s testimony, Phillips was the owner. When Steigerwalt came in two years ago, he put in no money and got 51 percent of the firm, although at around the same time he gave part of his own practice to Phillips. Steigerwalt claims that Robert Arentz, then a member of Phillips’s Arizona firm and also one who hung around the La Jolla firm, had 100 percent of Pacific Law Center and then 49 percent of the successor after Steigerwalt took control. In any case, Phillips basically ran Pacific Law Center, according to the Llamas and Slattery suits. Phillips did not respond to calls, and Arentz would not comment.

Phillips and Arentz have run into trouble with the State Bar of Arizona for using the same tactics that the San Diego firm used, both pre- and post-Steigerwalt. Phillips was censured and placed on two years of intensive probation by the Arizona bar in 2002. One of the reasons: so-called “intake personnel at his firm” who interviewed potential clients and failed to identify themselves as non-lawyers.

Late last year, the Arizona bar acted again: it recommended that Phillips be suspended for six months and a day and Arentz be suspended for 60 days. The bar said that the two “acted for their own immense financial benefit, overusing non-attorney employees for inappropriate tasks…to squeeze every last penny out of their clients.”

The Arizona Supreme Court upheld Arentz’s suspension but agreed to review Phillips’s. The bar had investigated 22 complaints, mainly on aggressive sales practices of non-attorney personnel.

And that goes to the heart of the complaints against Kerry Steigerwalt’s Pacific Law Center and its predecessor, both of which spent almost $5 million a year on advertising, according to Llamas’s suit. So-called “intake coordinators,” later called “legal administrators” (similar to those used by Larry Majors in Texas and Phillips in Arizona), greet the often impecunious people who have been swayed by the advertising.

According to the Pancer team, the intake coordinators are often former car salesmen who con the clients, asking initially for a high price and then coming down when meeting resistance. “The fee is based on how much the client is able to pay, not on traditionally recognized criteria such as complexity or novelty of legal issues and consumption of attorney time,” says the suit, which was dismissed on summary judgment and is now on appeal. Pacific Law Center’s intake coordinator told Llamas that the firm wins 90 percent of its Department of Motor Vehicles hearings, when the figure is actually 25 percent.

  • Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

More from SDReader

Comments

steigerwaltinsider July 21, 2010 @ 3:37 p.m.

Mike Pancer is a gentleman in characterizing Kerry Steigerwalt's pure unadulterated "Greed" as a desire for profit. It is common knowledge throughout the firm that it could cover its bills when Kerry took over.

0

steigerwaltinsider July 21, 2010 @ 4:02 p.m.

Are we all going to sit around and let this happen to us? I hope not San Diego,

0

steigerwaltinsider July 21, 2010 @ 4:20 p.m.

This is a classic "Bust Out Scheme" to take the money and run.

Can I say that or will I be sensored as well?

0

commonman July 21, 2010 @ 7 p.m.

"In his deposition, Steigerwalt said Pacific Law Center lawyers “were schleps,” according to the Llamas suit. Also, Steigerwalt admitted that he knew of the pressure tactics used by the intake coordinators. But he didn’t change things significantly, say the Llamas and Slattery suits. Indeed, Steigerwalt, said in the Slattery suit to make $900,000 yearly, was constantly checking to see if the firm was bringing in the daily gross receipts it needed to keep its head above water."

So Steigerwalt is saying that all his attorneys were "schleps"? I thought he said he brought good lawyers in to solve the old problems 2 years ago or so. What kind of a guy, constantly checks the receipts to make sure he got his $900,000 and call his guys "schleps"? Above water? He could care less, sounds like.

0

Don Bauder July 21, 2010 @ 7:21 p.m.

Response to post #1: Mike Pancer is a gentleman -- and also an attorney wanting to win a lawsuit for his client. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 21, 2010 @ 7:23 p.m.

Response to post #2: A Steigerwalt lawyer believing he or she has been wronged has plenty of options. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 21, 2010 @ 7:27 p.m.

Response to post #3: If you can prove it is a bust-out scheme, try to prove it in court. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 21, 2010 @ 7:29 p.m.

Response to post #4: The suits charge that he did not change the practices that he believed were odious. But why did he take over the firm in the first place? Best, Don Bauder

0

jstce4all July 21, 2010 @ 7:56 p.m.

This story is a joke! He is a scumbag and everyone knows it! He planned this for months! The TV stations are not going to take this lightly! I think his creditors should force him into BK so we can see where all the money went!! I actually saw Kerry today and he was thrilled that he is winding this down!

Believe me, we will see what kind of person Kerry really is once the dust settles and justice is served!

Greedy Lawyers...what else is new!

0

SurfPuppy619 July 21, 2010 @ 9:06 p.m.

According to the Pancer team, the intake coordinators are often former car salesmen who con the clients, asking initially for a high price and then coming down when meeting resistance. “The fee is based on how much the client is able to pay, not on traditionally recognized criteria such as complexity or novelty of legal issues and consumption of attorney time,” says the suit, which was dismissed on summary judgment and is now on appeal.

If this is true Kerry Steigerwalt should be disbarred. Those yahoo's from AZ should be enjoined from EVER doing busienss in CA again as it relates to law and the courts.

The CA State Bar should also notify the AZ Bar about all the issues and AZ should disbar Jeffrey Phillips.

These people are a danger to the public at large, and all of them should have their professional licenses revoked and run out of town-especially Kerry Steigerwalt.

Kerry Steigerwalt should be sued civilly by all the lawyers who he reamed in this fraud. They are lawyers, and if you're a lawyer you do NOT let people defraud you, especially other lawyers.

0

Grasca July 21, 2010 @ 9:59 p.m.

Lawyers suing lawyers. Better than the shootout at the OK Corral.

0

commonman July 21, 2010 @ 11:14 p.m.

re: "Kerry Steigerwalt's Pacific Law Center, LLP" The Secretary of State says it never existed. A major no-no that leaves you open to be sued personally.

Can he transfer clients like cattle? Me thinks not.

So why not report them and let the government who is supposed to protect the tax paying consumer do so? Then,Don Bauder, they will "prove it in court" - try that one on for size.

So Don Bauder, I think that is how you start to "prove it in court" like the insider alluded. The Best to You.

0

steigerwaltinsider July 21, 2010 @ 11:25 p.m.

In response to #6. Don, exactly what are you talking about? If a lawyer working for Steigerwalt is not privy to how much money Kerry is taking and where exactly he is putting it(and finds out months later the bills are unpaid).

But instead, that lawyer "with plenty of options" is defending the client to the best of his or her ability, as the oath they took provides..... are you saying that the lawyer's option is to bail out on the clients... is that what you are saying?

Don, I think the State Bar of California has a different view. Take care of your clients and don't quit on them. Kerry Steigerwalt is the one quitting on them now ... is that one of his "options" in your view? Really? Then Bully for Kerry Steigerwalt, he may have your vote, not mine.......or the State Bar.

0

steigerwaltinsider July 21, 2010 @ 11:31 p.m.

Response to Post # 8 "It was the greed, stupid" Kerry said in a Metro magazine article that a judge looked it over for him. Implying he did his due dilligence in determining how much money he could make. Do you think this "prominent defense lawyer" was duped? The facts say otherwise. He knew straight away.$$$$$$$$ cha ching!

0

Grasca July 22, 2010 @ 6:12 a.m.

Was Attorney Steigerwalt truly "prominent" or very good with PR ?

0

Don Bauder July 22, 2010 @ 7 a.m.

Response to post #9: It's not often that I get excoriated for writing an alleged puff piece. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 22, 2010 @ 7:08 a.m.

Response to post #10: I have no idea if you are right on that. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 22, 2010 @ 7:13 a.m.

Response to post #11: The Arizona Bar has probed the Phillips firm at length and has disciplined him twice (the state supreme court is reviewing the second). The California Bar has been informed of the practices. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 22, 2010 @ 7:15 a.m.

Response to post #12: Lawyers suing lawyers is not that unusual. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 22, 2010 @ 7:19 a.m.

Response to post #13: My column didn't get into Steigerwalt's loan modification business because of space limitations. I did do reporting on it, and could cover the topic at a later date. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 22, 2010 @ 7:25 a.m.

Response to post #13: I don't think that I am expressing myself either way on the topic that has you so exercised. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 22, 2010 @ 7:27 a.m.

Response to post #14: I heard that story of a retired judge doing due diligence before he took over Pacific Law Center. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 22, 2010 @ 7:30 a.m.

Response to post #15: He continued spending almost $5 million a year on advertising after taking control, according to information introduced in court. Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 July 22, 2010 @ 8:21 a.m.

He continued spending almost $5 million a year on advertising after taking control, according to information introduced in court.

That would still not match Sam Spital's spending/advertising budget!

0

Founder July 22, 2010 @ 10:38 a.m.

The Bigger question is, what if anything will the California Bar Do and when?

If they are supposed to be policing their members, why then have they let this happen and are allowing any "F" or "D" lawyers to practice in California?

0

Don Bauder July 22, 2010 @ 12:43 p.m.

Response to post #24: And look what happened to Spital. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 22, 2010 @ 12:46 p.m.

Response to post #25: Very good question. It will be interesting to see what the California bar does or does not do. Arizona has acted decisively in three cases involving the same aggressive salesmanship by non-lawyers. The people whom Arizona disciplined ran the Pacific Law Center. Best, Don Bauder

0

Founder July 22, 2010 @ 1:51 p.m.

Response to post #27: It would also be interesting to find out if the California Bar would release a listing of it's members that are in the "F" and "D" ratings as a public service!

Perhaps we could call it "$windlers List!

0

Don Bauder July 22, 2010 @ 2:27 p.m.

Response to post #28: Not to mention all the lawsuits against the firm and its predecessor. Best, Don Bauder

0

bidello July 22, 2010 @ 8:57 p.m.

Steigerwalt, there is no way you will ever get the people in San Diego (and San Diego county)to beleave that you did not know about Larry Majors. Larry Majors is a low life. But hey I bet he got is weekly payment's $,$$$.$$. and you are probably still paying him.

Shame on you!! What is so sad about this is Larry Majors and his son and son Inlaw will continue to do this until he is locked up for good. Then and only then will lawyers be safe again.

0

kayakSD July 22, 2010 @ 9:11 p.m.

GREED: Greed is desirous, devouring, gluttonous, mercenary, exploitative, craving, covetous, and it allows one to accumulate beyond individual needs. Greed is selfish and resides at the opposite end of generous, caring, and giving.

Greed makes us ignorant of others' needs and causes us to think only of ourselves.

"....but those who are stingy will lose everything." PROVERBS 11:24

0

commonman July 22, 2010 @ 10:18 p.m.

The Arizona connection is old news and it is like the president blaming the last administration, I don't care if you are Dem or Rep. It get's old...especially after a few years.

Don, can you write a story about what is happening now?

And isn't that why they call it "News" anyway?

Just this last week....not over two years ago.... people are saying that Kerry transferred hundreds of cases to other lawyers unbenounced to his clients. That is news.

Or people going to the Chula Vista and Escondido KSPLC office only to find the doors closed and no message or direction...news.

0

SurfPuppy619 July 23, 2010 @ 12:11 a.m.

Perhaps we could call it "$windlers List!

By Founder

Founder, I must say, you have come up with some very good lines lately ......I am impressed!

0

SurfPuppy619 July 23, 2010 @ 12:14 a.m.

Just this last week....not over two years ago.... people are saying that Kerry transferred hundreds of cases to other lawyers unbenounced to his clients.

By commonman

That would be "abandoning" your client, and there would be a 100% certainty that your law license, if not revoked/disbarred, would be suspended for a good length of time.

I find that hard to swallow given the consequences of the act, it would be giving up your livelyhood.

0

SurfPuppy619 July 23, 2010 @ 12:22 a.m.

The Bigger question is, what if anything will the California Bar Do and when?

By Founder

Unless it is an ongoing, MAJOR threat to the public, the Bar is slow to act.

But IF, a big if here, Steigerwalt is abandoning clients without their approval or knowldge, then the Bar could and most likely would ask the State Bar Court for an emergency order, effective immediately, ordering Steigerwalt to involuntary inactive status for irreparable injury .

0

commonman July 23, 2010 @ 7:46 a.m.

The Bigger question is, what if anything will the California Bar Do and when?

The Bar has not done squat. They are "monitoring the situation" and that is somewhat of a joke. Unless complaints are filed with the State Bar, Kerry can abandon away.....which is what he is doing with gusto.

He is probably planning his next trip to Hawaii to stash the cash.

Too bad.

0

Don Bauder July 23, 2010 @ 7:54 a.m.

Response to post #30: I doubt that Larry Majors's son Austin and Larry's son-in-law Phillips will be "locked up" for running their sales spiel operation. But Phillips has been disciplined by the Arizona Bar twice (the second is being reviewed by the Arizona Supreme Court.) I would hope that this model of using non-lawyers to con potential clients will end in both Arizona and California. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 23, 2010 @ 7:56 a.m.

Response to post #31: But it's greed that makes the world go 'round...and off its course. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 23, 2010 @ 7:58 a.m.

Response to post #32: But you have to put news in historical context. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 23, 2010 @ 8 a.m.

Response to post #33: He should be producing movies. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 23, 2010 @ 8:02 a.m.

Response to post #34: Can't comment because I don't know that this happened. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 23, 2010 @ 8:03 a.m.

Response to post #34: We'll see. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 23, 2010 @ 8:05 a.m.

Response to post #36: At least one complaint has already been filed. Best, Don Bauder

0

jwfonte July 23, 2010 @ 9:45 a.m.

KSPLC Got me off the hook in Vista. Can't bitch about that. However I was schlepped into a jivea$$ dance with the money, along with strongarm tactics with the boys in the back room. That is giving me the grease to cut 'em off. I doubt my attorney (a very sharp young lad) had a clue about the "bidniss" end .

0

Don Bauder July 23, 2010 @ 10:12 a.m.

Response to post #44: I am being told by some of the attorneys that they didn't know about the shoddy business practices of the sales personnel. Of course, the piano player always says he has no idea what is going on upstairs. Best, Don Bauder

0

commonman July 23, 2010 @ 12:40 p.m.

Response to #45 - Don, sometimes the piano player needs to feed his family. So that gives Kerry a pass in your eyes - really?

History is nice in history books. How about some new "news" Don?

0

Founder July 23, 2010 @ 1:27 p.m.

In this day and age and with the Dept. of Homeland Security in "the know"; it continually amazes me that these our Public Officials can still use the "We did not know about that" excuse with US when it comes to these Perp's ripping the Public Off and get away with it!

In State, out of State, it makes no difference; if a persons penal record follows them forever why can Lawyers and other Wealthy folks that "are" these Corporations always just move to another town and set up shop, to do the same thing again and again.

America in the last decade has truly become the Land of the Rich, and they always seem to "skip" legal entanglements while the poor go to jail...

Our Scales of Justice need some lube to swing free for all!

0

Burwell July 23, 2010 @ 1:35 p.m.

But IF, a big if here, Steigerwalt is abandoning clients without their approval or knowldge, then the Bar could and most likely would ask the State Bar Court for an emergency order, effective immediately, ordering Steigerwalt to involuntary inactive status for irreparable injury .

=================

It's not clear to me that Steigerwalt was practicing law at the Pacific Law Center, a corporation with a separate legal existence. Steigerwalt was apparently Chief Executive Officer ("CEO") of a corporation that hired lawyers who in turn provided legal services directly to the public. Steigerwalt was not practicing law and representing clients as CEO. He was managing a business. I would be surprised if Steigerwalt's name appeared on a single retainer agreement between the corporation and its clients. Steigerwalt appears to be in a position to argue that he was merely the piano player and should not be held responsible for the actions of the other attorneys who worked for the corporation.

0

Burwell July 23, 2010 @ 1:38 p.m.

"Kerry Steigerwalt's Pacific Law Center, LLP" The Secretary of State says it never existed. A major no-no that leaves you open to be sued personally.

It's listed on the Secretary's website as a corporation. It lools like Steigerwalt formed two new legal corporations this month.

0

Founder July 23, 2010 @ 2:06 p.m.

Reguarding #49 A couple of "going away" presents for San Diego?

0

commonman July 23, 2010 @ 7:19 p.m.

Respnse to comment #49 - I don't think that you can "undo" fraud. But Kerry or the State Bar or the District Attorney, or the United States Attorney might know better than I. Seems like the misrepresentation has been done.

Kind of like returning the merchandise to the store after you have stolen it. Nice gesture, but doesn't count.

0

Don Bauder July 23, 2010 @ 7:20 p.m.

Response to post #46: I hardly think Kerry Steigerwalt has been given a pass in this column. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 23, 2010 @ 7:23 p.m.

Response to post #47: I remember a classic cartoon in the New Yorker several years (perhaps decades) ago. A judge is looking down sardonically at a tattered defendant. Says the judge, "Crime doesn't pay at your level." Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 23, 2010 @ 7:26 p.m.

Response to post #48: And remember, Kerry Steigerwalt's Pacific Law Center was not registered with the secretary of state. Pacific Law Center was. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 23, 2010 @ 7:28 p.m.

Response to post #49: When I was preparing this column circa two weeks ago, I couldn't find Kerry Steigerwalt's Pacific Law Center registered. Do you know when it registered? Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 23, 2010 @ 7:30 p.m.

Response to post #50: Going away? Where? Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 23, 2010 @ 7:33 p.m.

Response to post #51: Just keep in mind that this is San Diego. The scales of justice are tilted. The establishment prevails. Best, Don Bauder

0

commonman July 23, 2010 @ 10:39 p.m.

Response to post #52 - Hardly got a pass? You have not scratched the surface of damage Mr. Steigerwalt has caused in the lives of hundreds of down and out San Diegans....that is a pass my friend.

So when will you do the real reporting and find out what he has done and report it. I think you still have what it takes Don, step up!

0

Don Bauder July 24, 2010 @ 6:19 a.m.

Response to post #58: It is seldom I get blasted for running puff pieces. But I have been called a sissy several times in the last couple of weeks. Maybe, at last, people will call me Little Mary Sunshine. Best, Don Bauder

0

Founder July 24, 2010 @ 8:32 a.m.

Response to #56 As in

"Going Away": That's for the Judge and or Jury to decide.

"Where": Lots of nice places to choose from, "The Big House", "Up the River", Club Fed or "South of the Border".

Thanks for asking!

0

Burwell July 24, 2010 @ 8:42 a.m.

Maybe, at last, people will call me Little Mary Sunshine. Best, Don Bauder

You're the Hunter S. Thompson of business journalists.

0

David Dodd July 24, 2010 @ 8:57 a.m.

"You're the Hunter S. Thompson of business journalists."

Wow, didn't see THAT one coming.

Fear and Loathing in San Diego: A Savage Journey to the Heart of the American Scam?

Could be, could be...

0

Founder July 24, 2010 @ 9:07 a.m.

Response to #59 Maybe, at last, people will call me Little Mary Sunshine. Best, Don Bauder or Maybe Little Donny Sunshine Best

0

Robert Johnston July 24, 2010 @ 10:40 a.m.

Get the ropes noosed and the horses ready--looks like there's a hanging party for all hands at Steigerwalt's Pacific Law Center!

Can we haul Esquire Steigerwalt into bankruptcy court and force him to open both his and the Pacific Law Center's books? Or can we trust even those not to be cooked as crispy as the ones from the Genco Pura Olive Oil Company of Brooklyn (V. Andolini Corleone, owner) were?

And as for Pollyanna and her "goat's foot jelly"? Not on your nelly! I never saw Mr. Bauder as Pollyannaish in thinking, especially when reading these blog threads. That's why I like this blog so much. After all, I daresay that Pollyanna would never have chosen "Scam Diego" if she were spilling her treacally, sweet-scented, barf-inducing ipecac on this site!

This town doesn't need an enema--frankly, it needs something far more radical.

--LPR

0

Founder July 24, 2010 @ 11:42 a.m.

Regarding #66:
"This town doesn't need an enema--frankly, it needs something far more radical." LPR

-- Anti Apathy --

How about a well informed, caring public that has a real chance of making a change for a change; instead of another big financial trick by a bunch of rich yahoo's building homes on our range!

If there is a sucker born every minute and only a few decide to vote, it's no wonder the ultra Rich win it, hire their friends and do nothing of impot.

So we still blog and debate, to encourage others to get involved about our City and State. If they did so, this problem would be solved!

0

commonman July 24, 2010 @ 12:04 p.m.

I stumbled on to the UT blogs from current and former cliens of Mr. Steigerwalt and dare I say, none of them are the least bit flattering. Felonious is the first word that comes to mind when I read about Steigerwalt taking money from these people and leaving them high and dry. Here is one of the comments on the UT blog:

"pacific law center is opening another firm with new owner but the same lawyer, i was told after i asked for my money back and told me to hang on tell we open the new firm and we will refile the case for you after this problem will be resolved , and agreed to refile for free but they said my case will go to the new office,,,,,i filed a complain with California bar association and attorney general . so when i ask for my money they told me to take a hike we don't refund money but i am going after them tell i get my money i am out more than 5000 dollar and i might lose my house.

That is a small sampling. I just think if that guy "McConnville" or something like that - who ripped off a bunch of people in a mortgage scam is not any different than Steigerwalt and Simon. After some serious reporting, McConnville finally got indicted....

I would like to think that Don would stick up for the little guy, not just illegitimate "high profile" guys like poor Kerry Steigerwalt and Bill Simon, Jr. at San Diego Law Firm (at the expense of the little guy).

0

Burwell July 24, 2010 @ 12:44 p.m.

Can we haul Esquire Steigerwalt into bankruptcy court and force him to open both his and the Pacific Law Center's books?

Pacific Law Center is a corporation. Steigerwalt is not personally liable for the corporation's debts if the corporation goes bankrupt. The most he can lose is his investment in the corporation's stock. He may have some liability if it can be shown that his alleged $75,000 per month salary contributed to the firm's collapse. Retainers received from clients should have been deposited into a Trust Account, which would not be considered part of the bankruptcy estate. If things were handled properly, clients should be able to obtain refunds of their unearned retainers even if Pacific Law goes bankrupt. Steigerwalt probably can't place Pacific Law Center into bankruptcy right now because the corporation almost certainly has liability insurance. He will most likely have to wait until the corporation is facing potential malpractice judgments in excess of the insurance coverage before he can file a bankruptcy petition on behalf of the corporation to flush its debts down the toilet. He will likely walk away free and clear.

0

commonman July 24, 2010 @ 1:01 p.m.

In response to the above posting that Kerry Steiegerwalt will walk.

Maybe, unless the "corporate veil is pierced" and judging from my past business experience in operating a corporation for a small business, you cannot have it both ways.

If you are saying you are an entity you are not (Kerry Steigerwalt's Pacific Law Center, LLP)first of all you must have partners (and file with the state. All the articles say the Kerry announced he had "100%" ownership - where are the lawyer patners - whoops!

Then you have several other corporations which have no rhyme or reason to what, if anything, was deposited into those corporations.

My small business "C" corporation, with only 4 employees, was audited by the EDD, State 'Franchise Tax Board and the IRS twice.

If those agencies act in any way like they did with me, Kerry Steigerwalt will not walk. And if the State is broke, they should be looking into people like Kerry.

0

Don Bauder July 24, 2010 @ 5:04 p.m.

Response to post #60: You didn't mention the usual San Diego punishment for white collar crime: probation -- sort of. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 24, 2010 @ 5:06 p.m.

Response to post #61: He was a little wild for me. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 24, 2010 @ 5:08 p.m.

Response to post 62: Didn't he use drugs? I don't need them to jack up my prose. Bes, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 24, 2010 @ 5:11 p.m.

Response to post #63: That works. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 24, 2010 @ 5:13 p.m.

Response to post #64: That's a new one on me. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 24, 2010 @ 5:15 p.m.

Response to post #65: Calves foot jelly hardly sounds enticing to me. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 24, 2010 @ 5:18 p.m.

Response to post #66: OK, how about Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farms? Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 24, 2010 @ 5:20 p.m.

Response to post #67: Pollyanna is Little Mary Sunshine's cousin? News to me! Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 24, 2010 @ 5:23 p.m.

Response to post #68: Trouble is, San Diego residents are permanent tourists. They want to go to the beaches and play golf. They don't want to rock any boats. That's why pickpockets choose to live in San Diego. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 24, 2010 @ 5:27 p.m.

Response to post #69: Steigerwalt has indeed opened a new law firm. That is mentioned in my column. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 24, 2010 @ 5:30 p.m.

Response to post #70: He does face a possible California Bar probe and several civil suits. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 24, 2010 @ 5:34 p.m.

Response to post #71: It's premature to speculate on legal actions against him. Best, Don Bauder

0

nan shartel July 24, 2010 @ 5:34 p.m.

How about Anne of Green Gables....now there's a redhead who could get things done!!!

All pioneers are considered to be afflicted with moonstruck madness. ...i think this quote of hers suits u Don

but then

"So we shall let the reader answer this question for himself: who is the happier man, he who has braved the storm of life and lived or he who has stayed securely on shore and merely existed?" — Hunter S. Thompson

maybe hunter 2....

nah it's POOH

“It is more fun to talk with someone who doesn't use long, difficult words but rather short, easy words like "What about lunch?"” Winnie the Pooh quotes

0

David Dodd July 24, 2010 @ 6:27 p.m.

Don, my friend, their are far less wonderful things in life as noble as being compared in any way to Hunter S. Thompson. Someone once pinned that on me, and while I know it's not true, I was flattered. Let it flatter you as well. Drugs or no drugs. He was a wonderful writer, regardless.

0

commonman July 24, 2010 @ 8:38 p.m.

So Don, you have not answered me.

Is this as far as it goes? Is this as good as it gets?

We have a great "historical perspective".

And now, what about the News.......?

0

nan shartel July 24, 2010 @ 10:45 p.m.

when Don knows the NEWS...he'll print it commonman...only YELLOW journalist create the news...and i'm so sick and tired of them i could vomit!

i guess u'll just have to look elsewhere for editorial speculation altho we all know that history is the greatest indicators of future behavior

and yes if u want to know the unbiased news...u will when when Mr Bauder knows

0

Don Bauder July 25, 2010 @ 7:22 a.m.

Response to post #84: "Let's do lunch" is considered a polite way to say, "Screw you." Another statement expresses the same sentiment: "Trust me." Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 25, 2010 @ 7:25 a.m.

Response to post #85: I ducked the compliment (or insult, however it was intended) because I honestly never read that much Hunter Thompson. It's another case of me being from the wrong generation. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 25, 2010 @ 7:26 a.m.

Response to post #86: No journalist is going to answer that question for fear of tipping off the competition. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 25, 2010 @ 7:31 a.m.

Response to post #87: I can say this: I don't believe the Kerry Steigerwalt saga is going away in the foreseeable future. I want my sources, and any new ones, to call and email me. (619-546-8529 and don.bauder@mac.com.) Best, Don Bauder

0

nan shartel July 25, 2010 @ 6:09 p.m.

88

nononono Don..that "how about lunch" was just pooh speech for a picnic invitation...funnin' ya

and another generation has a wider view of everything including the news

0

David Dodd July 25, 2010 @ 6:35 p.m.

Actually, next summer the Reader should host a picnic, bring your own stuff. That would be stellar, I'd love to meet my favorite Reader people, writers and commenters alike. Tres cool, oui?

0

Don Bauder July 25, 2010 @ 7:01 p.m.

Response to post #92: Trouble is, picnics draw aunts. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 25, 2010 @ 7:02 p.m.

Response to post #93: You'll have to take that up with management. I'm not in on such decisions. Best, Don Bauder

0

David Dodd July 25, 2010 @ 7:07 p.m.

@ #93: If management thinks it's a neat idea and you show up, I will ensure that you receive a fantastic supper, and in exchange you may enlighten me concerning Hayek, I'd love to hear your take on him outside of this forum.

0

Founder July 25, 2010 @ 7:13 p.m.

Regarding #93, #94, #95 & #96 - Blog Hog -

How about this every Fall If that order is not to tall?

I know it would be a blast, to meet all of you at last!

Let the Reader, invite and pick up the tab use a heater if it's cold, and let US Blab!

But who would report all the great retort,

I think it would be really keen, to depend upon a machine!

So please give us the big wink, and let US know what you think!

0

Russ Lewis July 25, 2010 @ 8:15 p.m.

(#93) Cool idea, Gringo. The Beat Farmers used to do it; I don't see why the Reader couldn't.

0

Founder July 25, 2010 @ 8:36 p.m.

Regarding # 98

...and Bob's your Uncle, so don't frown,

I think that would be the coolest invite in town...

0

David Dodd July 25, 2010 @ 8:41 p.m.

We'll make it happen guys, hope that Don can attend along with many others.

0

Don Bauder July 26, 2010 @ 6:07 a.m.

Response to post #96: I used to follow both the Austrian school and the University of Chicago school economists. I think their blind faith in the free market is misplaced. They just don't understand how corrupt and rigged so-called free markets are. But both schools have a lot to offer. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 26, 2010 @ 6:09 a.m.

Response to post #97: You can stand atop an anthill and recite poetry. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 26, 2010 @ 6:11 a.m.

Response to post #98: Again, the picnic decision has to be made at the top. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 26, 2010 @ 6:13 a.m.

Response to post #99: Do you suppose it would be covered by Burl Stiff? Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 26, 2010 @ 6:15 a.m.

Response to post #100: Suppose I traveled 1100 miles and nobody showed up? Best, Don Bauder

0

nan shartel July 27, 2010 @ 3:28 p.m.

105

I WOULD POOH...BRING WIFIE AND THE PUP...MAYBE BALBOA PARK

~~just a thought~~

0

David Dodd July 27, 2010 @ 3:49 p.m.

@ 101 - 106: This February or March, I'm going to begin to pester the Reader management about this. The Reader is an amazing part of the community, from Baja to Orange County, the Pacific to the Imperial County Line. I'd never dream of asking them to host anything, simply to encourage the writers and contributors to gather in one spot on some summer's afternoon. Make it a pot luck. It would be the coolest things ever to shake some hands, exchange some nice words. I'd be willing to bring some of my World famous bacon-wrapped stuffed jalapeños and a main dish, maybe some seafood. Someone could bring lemonade, someone else potato salad. You would be surprised at how neat these casual get-togethers can be.

The Reader might have a hundred reasons for not wishing to be involved, but I promise, when the time is ripe for the planning, I'll plead my case.

0

Don Bauder July 27, 2010 @ 4:02 p.m.

Response to post #106: I can't invite SurfPup because I have no idea who he is. Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 July 27, 2010 @ 5:23 p.m.

Pacific Law Center is a corporation. Steigerwalt is not personally liable for the corporation's debts if the corporation goes bankrupt

Not true-"piercing the corporate veil", happens all the time, it depends on what was going on, if there was fraud involved then Steigerwalt cannot shield himself from liability behind the corporate veil.

0

SurfPuppy619 July 27, 2010 @ 5:24 p.m.

It's not clear to me that Steigerwalt was practicing law at the Pacific Law Center, a corporation with a separate legal existence. Steigerwalt was apparently Chief Executive Officer ("CEO") of a corporation that hired lawyers who in turn provided legal services directly to the public. Steigerwalt was not practicing law and representing clients as CEO. He was managing a business.

===============

Non-lawyers CANNOT operate a law firm, CA. law and Bar ethical rules prohibits the situation you just described.

Lawyers cannot even share fees with non-layers. Steigerwalt is the head of PLC, and he is practicing law as head of the firm.

0

Founder July 27, 2010 @ 5:47 p.m.

Response to post #108

-- Reader Bloggers RSVP --

No worries, when it comes to it's bloggers,the Reader KNOWS ALL, and can invite the right people, hopefully early this Fall!

Keep it very simple, keep it cool, lots of chat, I'd be a real jewel!

Bring whatever, not just store bought, and dress casual, that's my thought

So good luck to you and the same to me, we'll all ask the Reader if it's to be...

and to all the rest I bid you the BEST.

0

Burwell July 27, 2010 @ 7:32 p.m.

Not true-"piercing the corporate veil", happens all the time, it depends on what was going on, if there was fraud involved then Steigerwalt cannot shield himself from liability behind the corporate veil.

There's no indication of fraud at this point. Steigerwalt appears to be a poor administrator and manager. I do not think it will be easy to disbar Steigerwalt. The State Bar will have to use an enormous amount of resources to build a case against him, if there is one. We have only heard one side of the story. I predict he will not be held liable for PLC's debts.

0

SurfPuppy619 July 27, 2010 @ 10:32 p.m.

I predict he will not be held liable for PLC's debts.

Another common way to piercing a corporate veil is through the intentional underfunding (or under capitalization) of the corp.

If Steigerwalt was indeed taking huge amounts of capital out of the corp., in the form of a salary, and that caused the corp to implode, that alone is enough for personal liability.

The corporate protection is designed and aimed at providing protections to honest business dealings, I don't know if PLC falls under that umbrella.

I have no idea what was going on at PLC, but I heard plenty of pretty awful stories, and the fact that they spent so much on TV advertising is a huge red flag-ala Sam Spital.

0

Don Bauder July 27, 2010 @ 10:58 p.m.

Response to post #109: The civil suits will be interesting. So will investigations, such as by the bar, if they are actually launched. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 27, 2010 @ 11 p.m.

Response to post #110: Does the fact that Kerry Steigerwalt's Pacific Law Center was not registered in the state make a difference? Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 27, 2010 @ 11:02 p.m.

Response to post #111: IN what? Best, Don Bauder

0

Burwell July 27, 2010 @ 11:39 p.m.

Response to post #110: Does the fact that Kerry Steigerwalt's Pacific Law Center was not registered in the state make a difference? Best, Don Bauder

===========

I'm not sure the corporation was operating as "Kerry Steigerwalt's Pacific Law Center. He likely appended his name to Pacific Law Center, PC because he thought his reputation would help business. The phrase "Kerry Steigerwalt's" may imply merely that he owns the corporation, not necessarily that he set up another corporation with his name in the title that he failed to register with the state. Also, Pacific Law Center, PC could be a wholly owned subsidiary of another corporation owned by Steigerwalt, or a subsidiary of an Arizona corporation. It's going to be an interesting battle as the lawyers descend upon Steigerwalt like a pack of jackals and try to disbar him and take his money away. I'm looking forward to the contest.

0

Don Bauder July 28, 2010 @ 7:33 a.m.

Response to post #118: I just hope that this doesn't get mired in a lot of legalistic wrangling. The basic questions revolve around the salesmen who gave a pitch to potential clients of the firm. Did they cross the line? Were they illegally practicing law? The Arizona Bar has certainly concluded that the model used in Phoenix -- apparently, the same one used in San Diego -- crossed the line. Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 July 28, 2010 @ 9:16 a.m.

Well, this is from the Sec of State's werbsite;

Entity Name: PACIFIC LAW CENTER, P.C. Entity Number: C2486283 Date Filed: 01/14/2003 Status: ACTIVE Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA Entity Address: 3030 N 3RD ST #1100 Entity City, State, Zip: PHOENIX AZ 85012 Agent for Service of Process: THOMAS SLATTERY Agent Address: 4225 EXECUTIVE SQUARE #1500 Agent City, State, Zip: LA JOLLA CA 92037

So if "Kerry Steigerwalt's Pacific Law Center" was what went on advertising, I think a case can be made that they were not registered.

0

SurfPuppy619 July 28, 2010 @ 9:20 a.m.

Entity Name: KERRY L. STEIGERWALT, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Entity Number: C2994078 Date Filed: 02/11/2008 Status: ACTIVE Jurisdiction: CALIFORNIA Entity Address: 4255 EXECUTIVE SQUARE #1500 Entity City, State, Zip: LA JOLLA CA 92037 Agent for Service of Process: KERRY L STEIGERWALT Agent Address: 4255 EXECUTIVE SQUARE #1500 Agent City, State, Zip: LA JOLLA CA 92037 ================ This is also listed.

It is clear from the records that KERRY L. STEIGERWALT, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION is not PACIFIC LAW CENTER, P.C.

They are two entirely different corps. The ads do NOT say KERRY L. STEIGERWALT, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION.

They also have different street addresses yet the same suite #, I don't know if those are typos on the states website or there are actually two different locations.

So a case can certainly be made that "Kerry Steigerwalt's Pacific Law Center" is not lisensed to do business in CA., nor entitled to corporate immunity.

0

SurfPuppy619 July 28, 2010 @ 9:28 a.m.

The phrase "Kerry Steigerwalt's" may imply merely that he owns the corporation, not necessarily that he set up another corporation with his name in the title that he failed to register with the state. Also, Pacific Law Center, PC could be a wholly owned subsidiary of another corporation owned by Steigerwalt, or a subsidiary of an Arizona corporation.

This is possible, but if this was the case then it could not be called "Kerry Steigerwalt's Pacific Law Center", it would have to be called "Corporation ABC's Pacific Law Center".

0

Don Bauder July 28, 2010 @ 1:19 p.m.

Response to post #120: Yes, that is what I found, too. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 28, 2010 @ 1:24 p.m.

Response to post #122: Phillips allegedly owned 100% of Pacific Law Center, although it was claimed that his Arizona law partner Arentz owned it. Then Steigerwalt gave part of his previous law practice to Phillips around the same time that Steigerwalt was getting 51% of the PLC firm without paying any money, while Arentz purportedly had the other 49%. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 28, 2010 @ 1:28 p.m.

Response to post #121 (sorry about that): It seems to me that you can list the name of a corporation and then use a different name for advertising, unless other rules apply to attorneys. Best, Don Bauder

0

soccermom72 July 28, 2010 @ 3:36 p.m.

This is really a non-story. A law firm going out of business. It happens all of the time in the legal industry. I am reading about 3 lawsuits filed which has automatically led the readers of this article to assume criminal activities were going on. 1 of the lawsuits has already been dismissed. I notice some former employees logging in to make comments. These employees unfortunately were recently let go because of the firms' financial problems which leads to animosity. Everyone is looking for the next hot & juicy corruption story, I am afraid to tell you that this isn't it. Don Bauder is reaching here but he has attracted some vultures which is part of his job as well.

0

Don Bauder July 28, 2010 @ 4:41 p.m.

Response to post #126: I don't think it's a non-story, but maybe I don't have the Olympian detachment to make such a judgment. I think it is necessary to get to the bottom of what these non-lawyer salesmen were telling potential clients. Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 July 28, 2010 @ 5:32 p.m.

Everyone is looking for the next hot & juicy corruption story, I am afraid to tell you that this isn't it. Don Bauder is reaching here but he has attracted some vultures which is part of his job as well.

By soccermom72 3:36 p.m., Jul 28, 2010

Hmmm...soccermom72 just registered today, and this is their only comment.

Please let us know the inside story, which you imply you have, as you see it.

0

commonman July 28, 2010 @ 8:16 p.m.

Okay Burwell, this is how it goes, (I think). Kerry Steigerwalt's Pacific Law Center, LLP (Limited Liability Partnership) is an "entity" or supposed to be an LLP entity. Not an APC by a different name. And I think you are supposed to have partners in an LLP - big difference from an APC regardless of the name.

So if you look at the names listed in the Sec. of State. it is not a listed entity. Look at the commercials on youtube and you will see he was clearly trying to mislead the public and all the people he refuses to pay. Kind of like you signing a lease "John Smith" and that is not your name. No bueno.

Lawyers don't make these kind of mistakes on "accident".

So, Kerry may claim he made a mistake (doubtful) and then that he paid all his money in advertising (but what if he owns the advertising company that buys the advertising)? Or pays his wife to do what? you know, those sorts of questions.

There may be a bad moon rising!

0

Don Bauder July 28, 2010 @ 10:13 p.m.

Response to post #128: By using the word "their" are you suggesting that there are 72 soccer moms behind this message? Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 28, 2010 @ 10:15 p.m.

Response to post #129: You think it's a bad moon. Soccermom72 says it's a tempest in a teapot. We have a controversy here. Best, Don Bauder

0

Burwell July 28, 2010 @ 11:02 p.m.

I am reading about 3 lawsuits filed which has automatically led the readers of this article to assume criminal activities were going on. 1 of the lawsuits has already been dismissed.

Steigerwalt should issue a statement explaining his side of the story before the rumors get out of control. I have not heard any credible evidence that indicates he's done anything wrong. He should call Don and give him the scoop and clear the air. Many news junkies are interested in this story and want the facts. Many are also interested in the legal issues involved in this case, including whether the entity operating the law center was doing business without a state license.

0

Don Bauder July 29, 2010 @ 7:03 a.m.

Response to post #132: I called Steigerwalt several times as I was working on the story. I finally reached him and as I started asking questions, he wanted them emailed to him. I emailed him about 20 questions, as I recall, and he got back with his interpretation, although he didn't answer some questions. He was given more than sufficient chance to give his side of the story. Best, Don Bauder

0

kw July 29, 2010 @ 9:11 a.m.

Kerry is most definitely practicing. He represented the scumbag drunk driver/meth head that killed my husbands little brother.

His list of expert witnesses were just as unethical as he was and is. The lies were devastating to hear in court for our family. Tried to blame an innocent victim and change the facts and even the roads. It would have been laughable if it wasn't happening to us.

0

insidescoop858 July 29, 2010 @ 10:25 a.m.

To the reporter of this story I say stay focused (this is old news)... There is a new storm a brewin, forget about Kerry Steigerwalt your sniffing around the wrong sewage canal. This is exactly what the NEW STORM wants, allows them to settle in and start a whole new cesspool, because the spotlight is elsewhere, and by the time dbauder and greg moran find out about this NEW STORM it will be to late. I am not here to help with your reporting but I will give you a little hint. Istead of sending emails to Kerry, maybe you should find out where all these out of work ex-employees and disgruntled attorneys are headed and it's not the unemployment line. This NEW STORM was lying in wait, "if it keeps on rainin, levee's going to break and when the levee breaks they will have no where to go (weak souls) and now these ex-attorneys that need structure and need there hands held because they can't do it for themselves will look to a new firm or a NEW STORM. dbauder you seem like a good journalist, now this is going to take some hard work on your behalf, but if you find the right manhole and remove or uncover this story you will and can nip it in the bud and be our Febreeze to all this stink...
1st and last post GOOD LUCK

0

Don Bauder July 29, 2010 @ 11:37 a.m.

Response to post #134: Did he win the case? Or at least wangle an easy punishment for the perpetrator? Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 29, 2010 @ 11:40 a.m.

Response to post #135: You can give me more information by emailing me at don.bauder@mac.com or phone 619-546-8529. Best, Don Bauder

0

kw July 29, 2010 @ 2:13 p.m.

Yes, he did win the case in a way.

The offender was charged by the state with 2nd degree murder, he killed 2 people in the collision and seriously injured one other. He of course walked away with only a scratch.

He was found innocent of 2nd degree murder. Guilty of Gross Vehicular Manslaughter.

The state proved it's case on the 2nd degree, at least we thought they did. No license, no insurance, unregistered vehicle and drove to a bar in the middle of the day. Drank 12 shots (3 Long Island Ice Teas) and was coming down off of meth. Was told by the bartender not to drive after she cut him off from the booze.

Drove aggressively and passed cars on double yellow lines around blind curves. Killed my brother-in-law while passing on the 3rd blind curve, double yellows too.

Second degree murder says that if you do something that "you know" could kill someone and you do it anyhow. Disregard for human life.

Now we are left without the baby of the family and my in-laws are heartbroken. We all are.

Thank God those darn commercials are off the air. Especially when the drunk drivers parents starred in some of those commercials with Kerry coming on and saying, "Bad things happen to good people"................

WTH?

0

SurfPuppy619 July 29, 2010 @ 6:09 p.m.

He was found innocent of 2nd degree murder. Guilty of Gross Vehicular Manslaughter.

The state proved it's case on the 2nd degree, at least we thought they did. No license, no insurance, unregistered vehicle and drove to a bar in the middle of the day. Drank 12 shots (3 Long Island Ice Teas) and was coming down off of meth. Was told by the bartender not to drive after she cut him off from the booze.

Drove aggressively and passed cars on double yellow lines around blind curves. Killed my brother-in-law while passing on the 3rd blind curve, double yellows too.

Second degree murder says that if you do something that "you know" could kill someone and you do it anyhow. Disregard for human life.

If this was a first time DUI the 2nd Degree rap won't stick.

BUT if there is one prior DUI then a 2nd Degree would stick-I don't know the facts of your case but I suspect that the perp was a first time offender-not that that matters or should matter, it is just how our legislators wrote the law.

There is a high profile 2nd Degree case, with prior DUI's, pending in Orange County right now that invloved Angels pitcher Nick Adenhart, killed by a repeat DUI offender ............

0

Don Bauder July 29, 2010 @ 7:18 p.m.

Response to post #138: It certainly sounds like he got off easy. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 29, 2010 @ 7:22 p.m.

Response to poste #139: Pardon me, but I don't think the law should require a second offense, if it indeed does, to get a person for second degree murder. Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 July 29, 2010 @ 10:28 p.m.

Pardon me, but I don't think the law should require a second offense, if it indeed does, to get a person for second degree murder.

I agree with you 100%.

I don't drink alcohol for a reason-I never want to make a mistake that I will regret for the rest of my life. Alcohol by far is the most widely abused drug in America and the world.

DUI's that result in death should have a presumtion of willful and intentional liability.

The fact is it is still way too light, even after they have jacked up the time on DUI liability. Used to be you could kill people in a DUI and do just county time (less than 1 year).

0

BalboaQueen July 30, 2010 @ 12:38 a.m.

Were any clients of Pacific Law Center asked to perform sexual favors for a refund?

0

Don Bauder July 30, 2010 @ 7:38 a.m.

Response to post #142: Yes, that's one very good reason not to drink. I don't drink either. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 30, 2010 @ 7:40 a.m.

Response to post #143:Don't know a thing about that. Best, Don Bauder

0

kw July 30, 2010 @ 11:17 a.m.

It was his first DUI offense.

He had a long line of other offenses but no DUI. He was 33 and so WAY old enough to know better. His father was a retired Fire Captain, pretty sure he lectured his kids on drinking and driving.

A person is killed every 2 days by a drunk driver in San Diego.

Second Degree WAS met and proven.

Second Degree Murder-"a killing caused by dangerous conduct AND the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life."

Drove to a bar in the middle of the day that does NOT serve food, only booze, peanuts and popcorn.

If you are driving there (with no license,insurance or a registered vehicle) to drink without making prior arrangements for safe transportation after wards then it would be assumed that you are making the choice to drive home, right?

Then to be told NOT to drive. Then to drive anyhow.

Then to pass on double yellows on blind curves on a dangerous mountain road that he knew was dangerous. He lived off of the road.

To me EVEN without a prior conviction, this shows " dangerous conduct AND the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life."

2 people dead. One young girl that had her arms and legs crushed and she witnessed the death of her boyfriend whom she loved dearly. Shattered lives.

Will probably end up doing 11 years.

0

kw July 30, 2010 @ 5:29 p.m.

Well, I can say that there is a trend towards charging 2nd degree even when it's a first offense.

Before the D.A. charged the 2nd degree they looked up case law, lots of it. It is happening, everywhere. DUI drivers are being charged with 2nd degree murder all over the country.

The courts clarified on Second Degree murder having to do with DUI below.

"One who willfully consumes alcoholic beverages to the point of intoxication, knowing that he must operate a motor vehicle, thereby combining sharply impaired physical and mental facilities with a vehicle capable of great force and speed, reasonably may be held to exhibit a conscious disregard of the safety of others." People v. Watson, 30 Cal. 3d 290 (1981)

I know we have gone totally off topic here, my original post was geared more towards the drunk drivers defense attorney Mr. Steigerwalt and his ethics issues. I understand that he was trying to defend his client. But his "expert" witnesses were shady, dishonest and their facts were far from the truth. It was disgusting, frustrating and a bit heartbreaking at the time. I don't want to go too deep into all of the details but we did not leave that trial feeling like he had any ounce of integrity at all.

What I will say though is we have to make a stand and stop the killing of innocent victims on our roads by drivers under the influence. We are losing too many people to this senseless crime.

The courts are starting to take this seriously and if you choose to drink and drive be forewarned, short easy sentences are going bye-bye.

In 2008 (the year that my BIL was killed)the United States lost almost 12,000 people to DUI. In one year. Senseless. Not even the ENTIRE Iraq/Afghanistan War has taken that many US lives since 2001.

Harsher punishments,stricter laws and more education.

Enough of people NOT being responsible for their own actions. You want to be smashed, fine. Don't drive. That's such a damn simple thing to follow. Such a simple thing and had it been followed, my sweet brother-in-law would be in the prime of his life right now and we would not be spending holidays at a cemetery.

0

Don Bauder July 31, 2010 @ 12:21 p.m.

Response to post #146: Both you and SP are educating me on this topic. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 31, 2010 @ 12:25 p.m.

Response to post #147: Of course, there is another factor few talk about: what happens to people in prison? Generally, they become more of a societal menace. When they emerge, they are very often more dangerous than when they went in. That is a factor judges must take into account. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 31, 2010 @ 12:28 p.m.

Response to post #148: I think you may be right on the prosecutors' strategy. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 31, 2010 @ 12:40 p.m.

Response to post #149: Remember that Steigerwalt's job as a defense counsel was to do the best job he could for his client. The U.S. legal system is not like Britain's. There, the defense counsel helps the judge in trying to solve the crime. Here, the defense counsel's job is to get his client off. Particularly in white collar fraud cases, many lawyers use their power as an attorney to help concoct and then cover up their clients' fraud -- and sometimes the lawyers themselves participate in the fraud. Those attorneys should land in the slammer. Usually they don't. But I am gratified to learn that an attorney for Texas's Wyly brothers, who have been charged in a civil suit by the SEC, was named. Those brothers have abused offshore banking rules for years; a Congressional study several years ago detailed the machinations. The brothers say they just followed advice of an attorney. This is not yet a criminal action, but could become one. Those are the kinds of cases in which lawyers should get punished along with their clients. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 31, 2010 @ 12:45 p.m.

Response to post #150: What we need is some research: what to the criminologists say? Do these tough laws inhibit drunken driving? Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 July 31, 2010 @ 2:46 p.m.

To me EVEN without a prior conviction, this shows " dangerous conduct AND the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life."

2 people dead.

By kw

You will get no argument from me, I agree.

If you drive DUI and kill someone then you need to do serious time............

0

SurfPuppy619 July 31, 2010 @ 3:14 p.m.

The courts clarified on Second Degree murder having to do with DUI below.

"One who willfully consumes alcoholic beverages to the point of intoxication, knowing that he must operate a motor vehicle, thereby combining sharply impaired physical and mental facilities with a vehicle capable of great force and speed, reasonably may be held to exhibit a conscious disregard of the safety of others." People v. Watson, 30 Cal. 3d 290 (1981)

That is a good case-and Rose Birds dissent is interesting (who would have guessed!!!!).

But you left out the paragraph that follows;

"We do not suggest that the foregoing facts conclusively demonstrate implied malice, or that the evidence necessarily is sufficient to convict defendant of second degree murder. On the contrary, it may be difficult for the prosecution to carry its burden of establishing implied malice to the moral certainty necessary for a conviction. Moreover, we neither contemplate nor encourage the routine charging of second degree murder in vehicular homicide cases"

And in this case the defendant was driving down residential streets at 80 MPH running red lights-that is not going to be the case in most DUI vehichular deaths.

But I agree, with most others, the sentences for DUI resulting in death are wat too light.

0

Don Bauder July 31, 2010 @ 11:08 p.m.

Response to post #156: But suppose the guilty one is a young man or woman with no prior offenses. The prison sentence could ruin their lives. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder July 31, 2010 @ 11:11 p.m.

Response to post #157: It looks like every case is different, and should be handled on an individual basis. Best, Don Bauder

0

Pinkie3 Aug. 1, 2010 @ 2:08 p.m.

To get more information about Pacific Law Center, I recommend you go to these three websites:

http://www.100freeattorneys.com/

http://10news-sandiego.pacificlawyerscenter.com/

http://www.losangelescountylaw.com/

Steigerwalt & Associates is going to be the same as PLC.

0

Don Bauder Aug. 1, 2010 @ 7:52 p.m.

Response to post #160: If so, it would seem Kerry Steigerwalt is not concerned about a bar investigation, if there is to be one. Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 Aug. 2, 2010 @ 11:45 a.m.

You mean as apposed to "ruining the life" of the person(s) they killed? Not to mention the affect on the lives of the surviving family members?

By crystalcove

If you make a DUI mistake that takes anothers life, then you deserve a serious prison term, and you let the chips fall where they may.

0

Don Bauder Aug. 2, 2010 @ 3:08 p.m.

Response to post #162: The axiom "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" is out of date -- in my opinion, anyway. That's particularly true since it's pretty clear that stiff penalties don't deter crime or untoward behavior. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 2, 2010 @ 3:12 p.m.

Response to post #163: It depends on the circumstances. If you are driving drunk at 90 miles an hour through an urban area, blowing stoplights, then yes: a very stiff penalty is warranted. If you are slightly over the limit on a breath test, and happen to get into an accident that could be blamed on two or three different drivers, then absolutely not. Best, Don Bauder

0

jerome Aug. 2, 2010 @ 5:20 p.m.

KW my deepest sorrow for your loss and the pain this whole debate is bringing up re

134-#138

0

nan shartel Aug. 2, 2010 @ 8:14 p.m.

drunk driving laws aren't severe enough..and that for sure...condolences kw

0

Don Bauder Aug. 2, 2010 @ 8:22 p.m.

Response to posts #s166 and 167: Condolences, yes-- but that doesn't mean that the law should imprison for a lengthy period every person accused of the crime. Best, Don Bauder

0

commonman Aug. 3, 2010 @ 7:32 a.m.

This discussion about DUI, Gross Vehicular, and 2nd degree is all very interesting. But I think this story was originally about the fleecing of money from good hard working people. The lastest facts, as I understand, are that Kerry Steigerwalt "unilaterally assigned" over two thousand bankruptcy cases to other lawyers, one of which was raided by the FBI, IRS, and the State Bar last month. Another lawyer is in Chicago. Would you be upset enough to file a Bar complaint if a lawyer did that to you? You pay $3500 for your Bankruptcy case to be filed and Steigerwalt gives an out of state lawyer or one possibly facing indictment $200 out of the $3,500 and says "do a good job".

That seems criminal to me. Taking money from people on their way to becoming homeless. What a champion of justice Steigerwalt is! Hooray for Kerry!!

San Diego mainstream press loves you. They won't say a thing. Your secret is safe with the mainstream UT, Reader, and TV stations (maybe they have agreed not to cover the story while Kerry "promises to pay them".

OMG

PS And people say the real story is where all the employees that Kerry fired under the pretense he was "not getting paid"? Uh, check the unemployment line, Einstein.

0

Don Bauder Aug. 3, 2010 @ 10:31 a.m.

Response to post #169: Tell me more about the alleged raid by the FBI, IRS and state bar. My email is don.bauder@mac.com and my phone is 619-546-8529. Best, Don Bauder

0

commonman Aug. 3, 2010 @ 11:12 a.m.

Don, Response to post #170 check out or paste this in to your web browser for the NC Times article. http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/oceanside/article_0af9b76d-4a5f-5045-bf22-c4dd318cde36.html It goes: Agents with the FBI, the Internal Revenue Service and the State Bar of California served search warrants Wednesday at two related Oceanside loan modification businesses.

The raids took place at the First American Law Center, 615 Mission Ave. in downtown Oceanside, and the Lead Source, 2101 El Camino Real.

FBI officials said there were no arrests Wednesday, and they declined further comment.

Dean Chandler, president of the First American Law Center, said he was in Arizona when his office was raided. He said he had not been contacted by agents, and he was not sure why his business was being investigated.

"We run a very clean shop," Chandler said during a telephone interview.

He said his year-old business places national ads offering to help troubled homeowners modify their loans.

Of about 2,000 people who have contacted the firm for help getting their monthly housing payments reduced, the firm has succeeded in helping 500, he said.

However, numerous Internet consumer review sites contain allegations from unhappy customers that the business is a "scam," pocketing an advanced fee, then failing to return calls or help with loan modifications.

Chandler said those allegations were false. He said the company has a money-back guarantee on its $3,495 loan modification service, and it has returned more than $1 million since opening in April 2009. The company keeps a $600 processing fee in every exchange, whether or not a loan can be modified, he said.

The company recently stopped asking for payment upfront in California, because of a new law that bars the practice, he said.

Chandler is an attorney who was admitted to the California Bar in 1992, according to the California State Bar's website. He has never had any action against his license, according to the site.

Second half on next post

0

commonman Aug. 3, 2010 @ 11:17 a.m.

And the Second Half -

Alan Gordon, a spokesman for the State Bar, would not comment on whether the bar is investigating Chandler or his firm.

He said bar representatives often accompany law enforcement on operations involving lawyers to "observe and consult."

Chandler said agents also visited the Lead Source, but he was not sure what happened there. He said the company is a call center owned by a man named Gary Bobel that helps respond to the First American Law Center's national ads.

The Lead Source website says it has produced ads for loan modification services, including some for First American.

Agents at the First American Law Center would not comment Wednesday, except to say a search warrant had been served.

Employees at the firm were being interviewed by agents and the offices were closed for the day.

Chandler said the First American Law Center has 60 employees.

It was not clear if the raids were part of a new national crackdown called "Operation Stolen Dreams" that is aimed at mortgage fraud. Federal law enforcement officials announced the program at a news conference in Washington, D.C., last week.

In the announcement, FBI Director Robert Mueller said hundreds of FBI agents were working on task forces with other law enforcement agencies around the country.

Staff writer Carly Hill and the Associated Press contributed to this report. Call staff writer Sarah Gordon at 760-740-3517.

Posted in Oceanside on Wednesday, June 23, 2010 8:01 pm Updated: 8:08 pm. | Tags: Top, Coastal, Nct, News, Oceanside, Blotter,

Don, There is not much difference in Chandlers "Lead Source" and Steigerwalt's "Wise Law Group" except that is where Kerry stashed all his advertising money and Kerry is partner with a non-lawyer and signs up mass tort cases for a percentage. Big no-no. Ah, but who cares in the main stream media. Too much work!

0

Don Bauder Aug. 3, 2010 @ 2:26 p.m.

Response to post #171: Oh yes, I knew about that, but I am not aware of any connection with KSPLC. It is true that KSPLC had a loan modification business. I looked into it. Steigerwalt assured me that the business had not run into trouble with the state bar or any government agency. I didn't mention it in the column. If you have information to the contrary, let me know. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 3, 2010 @ 2:30 p.m.

Response to post #172: Again, is there a connection to KSPLC, other than your assertion that both have the same modus operandi? If either the government or bar is after KSPLC on loan modification or any other aspect of its business, I would like to know. Best, Don Bauder

0

Falsely_Imprisoned Aug. 3, 2010 @ 8:10 p.m.

Contrary to what the article says, the Better Business Bureau gives Pacific Law Center an F.

0

David Dodd Aug. 3, 2010 @ 11:03 p.m.

I'm not defending Steigerwalt, but consider the source of the link. This is the description of who they are:

"The Injury Board is a growing community of attorneys, media professionals, safety industry experts, and local activists committed to making a difference by helping families stay safe and avoid injury, and helping those who are injured get the assistance they need to move on with their lives after an accident."

Sounds like one bunch of slimeballs sliming another bunch of slimeballs.

0

Don Bauder Aug. 4, 2010 @ 6:14 a.m.

Response to post #176: I checked the website: it was D-plus. I don't know what it is now. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 4, 2010 @ 6:16 a.m.

Response to post #177: There is plenty of evidence to show that the modus operandi of Kerry Steigerwalt's Pacific Law Center -- the sales jobs by the non-lawyers -- is bad. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 4, 2010 @ 6:18 a.m.

Response to post #178: I can't make such a judgment because I don't know the group. Best, Don Bauder

0

commonman Aug. 4, 2010 @ 7:42 a.m.

In response to Post #175 Posted by commonman

I don't know Don, you are the reporter.

But, as to bankrupcy, Dean Chandler is taking the bulk of Steigerwalt's bankruptcy cases. Many think Chandler will be indicted soon. Is it fair to Steigerwalt's clients to unilaterally reassign their cases to a guy that may be facing more trouble than Steigerwalt? What a conscious!

Okay,secondly, as to Loan Mods, there were Kerry Steigerwalt's TV ad representations that he could unlock Obama Sitmulus money for loan mods on the commercials. (Ha, ha, the jokes on you!) There are the depositions and allegations in the complaints against Steigerwalt indicating his "head loan mod attorney" was unlicensed for months during the intake of 5 million in loan mods. Do you suppose there could be problem there? Reporters do the investigations, unless they are spoon-feaded (sp?) online.....

Dean Chandler did 7 million in loan mods and was slow to refund. Steigerwalt did 5 million in loan mods with a skeleton crew and a suspended attorney and is slow to refund and even closes the door on his "practice".

Don't suppose there is a story there .....except for a few thousand San Diegans.

Don, you don't need a weather man to know which way the winds blow!

0

commonman Aug. 4, 2010 @ 7:48 a.m.

By the way Don, there are a lot of stories were there are no other "connections" other than those put together by good reporters.... One of the most sensational was probably the Watergate scandal.

Get it? That used to be why reporters dug into possible stories off tips.

Now, the reporters report what we already know ....yawn. I'm sleepy...zzzzzzz

0

commonman Aug. 4, 2010 @ 7:52 a.m.

And in Response to #174

"Steigerwalt assured me ..." Ha ha Ha

Does this sound familiar?

"I am not a crook!"

Consider your source Don, what is Steigerwalt going to say "Yes, absolutely, I stole a ton of money off trusting individuals on their last dime"

Really Don?

0

Don Bauder Aug. 4, 2010 @ 12:06 p.m.

Response to post #182: You are correct that a lawsuit and former Steigerwalt employees say that the loan modification business at the law firm was on the shady side. As you criticize me -- as is your right -- for not pursuing this story aggressively enough, you have to realize a couple of things: 1. I have other stories to pursue. I have done one major blog item and one major column on Steigerwalt. I am watching these other developments and will probably follow up. But it is not the only thing on my plate; 2. You appear to be obsessed with the matter. I am not criticizing this, I am merely saying that others in the so-called "mainstream media" that you blast have other fish to fry. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 4, 2010 @ 12:08 p.m.

Response to post #183: Maybe I am too stupid, rather than too sleepy, to connect all those dots. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 4, 2010 @ 12:13 p.m.

Response to post #184: I think you missed the point of what I said. I said Steigerwalt assured me that his loan modification business was not being investigated. That didn't mean that I believed him. It only meant that to get into the loan modification angle, I would have to do a lot more homework. And I was on deadline on the column. So the only thing I could do was leave that part out and perhaps pursue it in a later column. Best, Don Bauder

0

commonman Aug. 4, 2010 @ 5:54 p.m.

It's all good. Sometimes my ferver for justice is viewed or could be viewed as obsessive. But I will not accept your dismissal of the issue as laziness or being "too stupid".

it kind of reminds me of a reporter accepting statements like, "Depends on what the meaning of is, is." or I assure you, "I did not have sexual relations with that girl".

Too Stupid? I think not.

That is the easy way out my friend.

Nice try.

All the Best.

0

Don Bauder Aug. 4, 2010 @ 9:07 p.m.

Response to post #188: Gee. That's always been my best alibi: "I'm too dumb to grasp that." Best, Don Bauder

0

commonman Aug. 4, 2010 @ 10:11 p.m.

Respnse to post #189:

Huh?

"An alibi is a type of defence found in legal proceedings by demonstrating that the defendant was not in the place where an alleged offence was committed. There may be legal ramifications for not disclosing a true alibi defence, as well as penalties for providing a false alibi."

Don, I like you and your work, but if you are bowing out of this one with post #189, I need you to explain that to me like I'm a five year-old because I may be too stupid to get it! Kind Regards, CM

0

Don Bauder Aug. 5, 2010 @ 6:54 a.m.

Response to post #190: I said early on that I am not bowing out of this, even though I have done a long blog post and a comprehensive article. Best, Don Bauder

0

soccermom72 Aug. 5, 2010 @ 11:22 a.m.

This comment from "Common Man" proves that he has no knowledge of what is going on. There are hundreds of lawyers who ethically refer cases to other firms' for litigation purposes. There is no "Non Lawyer" partnered in this law firm and no advertising dollars being "stashed".

Don, There is not much difference in Chandlers "Lead Source" and Steigerwalt's "Wise Law Group" except that is where Kerry stashed all his advertising money and Kerry is partner with a non-lawyer and signs up mass tort cases for a percentage. Big no-no. Ah, but who cares in the main stream media. Too much work!

0

nan shartel Aug. 5, 2010 @ 12:30 p.m.

Don...it seems like many of ur blogs r in need a beer break lately

DOS EQUIS OR TECATE

wait...this is not a no alcohol zone is it???

0

Don Bauder Aug. 5, 2010 @ 12:54 p.m.

Response to post #192: I certainly didn't say that the non-lawyers were partners of the firm. By the way, the Reader doesn't think of itself as mainstream media. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 5, 2010 @ 12:56 p.m.

Response to post #193: You and I can pop for a round of Dos Equis. Best, Don Bauder

0

soccermom72 Aug. 5, 2010 @ 1:44 p.m.

response to #194 - I was quoting Common Man Don and was not implying you stated that.

0

Don Bauder Aug. 5, 2010 @ 3:11 p.m.

Response to post #196: Why thank me? I committed you to a big expense. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 5, 2010 @ 3:13 p.m.

Response to post #197: OK. Best, Don Bauder

0

Falsely_Imprisoned Aug. 5, 2010 @ 8:21 p.m.

Did Steigerwalt spend more money than he took in with Pacific Law Center?

Yellow Book, UTC Properties, former employees and former clients are all suing PCL, will there be a criminal probe?

Here are some interesting comments...

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/pacific_law_center_to_close_my_dream_became_a_nightmare_controlling_lawyer_/

0

Don Bauder Aug. 5, 2010 @ 8:47 p.m.

Response to post #200: All that remains to be seen. Best, Don Bauder

0

Pendleton Aug. 7, 2010 @ 1:39 p.m.

I think we may find that Stiegerwalt is just as bad as the infamous Rothstein:

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/broward/rothstein/

0

nancigorton Aug. 27, 2010 @ 7:22 p.m.

I gave the firm $6500 up front for a modification in March 2009. Just now they write that they were unable to get the modification we requested. They say we would get a partial refund but they have no money. "In the meantime, your patience is appreciated and allows us to dedicate our staff to completing outstanding fee reviews rather than fielding general inquiries related to the fee review process. If you have a concern that must be addressed before your fee review is complete, please direct it to clientservice@ks-plc.com. We truly wish that we were able to proceed faster, but our financial situation simply will not allow it. " I don't believe them now that I have read your article!

0

SurfPuppy619 Aug. 27, 2010 @ 9 p.m.

. http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/pacific_law_center_to_close_my_dream_became_a_nightmare_controlling_lawyer_/ .

WOW-that article is an eye opener-especially the comments.

I will say this, there have been a NUMBER of lawyers disbarred within the last 12 months over "loan modification" scams, and the comments on that ABA website and from nancigorton 7:22 p.m. above is the exact same conduct of the lawyers who were disbarred.

Pay them big upfront fees and no service or loan modification. The State Bar stopped the upfront fee policy because these scams were so prevalent.

Kerry could be disbarred.

I suggest that ALL of these people who paid fees upfront file a complaint with the State Bar; http://calbar.ca.gov/Attorneys/LawyerRegulation/ComplaintForm.aspx .

0

SurfPuppy619 Aug. 27, 2010 @ 9:15 p.m.

We truly wish that we were able to proceed faster, but our financial situation simply will not allow it. " I don't believe them now that I have read your article!

By nancigorton 7

They are not going to pay you anything.

I would file a claim in Small Claims Court-the limit has been raised to $7500, so you could get a judgement for your entire costs.

Go to Kerney Mesa (aka traffic court, in the back of 8950 Clairemont Mesa ) -file the claim. You will be in court and have a judgement within 45 days-it is by far your best option. I would file the cliam against PLC AND Kerry personally, b/c he is going to be the only one with $$$ to pay.

PLC is NOT going to give you back a dime voluntarily.

0

nancigorton Aug. 28, 2010 @ 8:45 a.m.

Response to comment #205

Thank you for your suggestion. I will do just that. I have been patient too long. You have given some light to this tunnel.

0

Sign in to comment

Join our
newsletter list

Enter to win $25 at Broken Yolk Cafe

Each newsletter subscription
means another chance to win!

Close