Horne Slaton P.L.L.C.

Critical: Professionalism, Quality, Responsiveness, ValueI rarely like to issue a review, but in this particular case the attorney used tactics that were questionable in action. The method used for gaining the case was persuasive, and then handed off to a subordinate that was not of the caliber expected. The case was treated more as a money position and practice for junior lawyers in the firm. This included an inability of the subordinate individual to accomplish the goals of the case and handed off to three other individuals (writing contents) with inconsistent strategies. In addition, the assigned subordinate lawyer had issues with spelling errors, sentence structure, and overall continuity to persuade the courts (including oral arguments) of the validity of the legal claims. The Godfather of the firm serves as a headstone to gain the business but very little evidence or guidance to gain a value added legal strategy. In addition, this attorney agreed in the case, my involvement with reviews, then would change the final documents to the courts. I suspected this situation, and as noted additional documents were also sent to the courts without my review as a paying customer. The difference in the expense of this attorney to a subordinate of course is substantial, but for my case I served more as a training case for the office. The subordinate missed court submissions without my asking, common last minute paperwork, delinquent emails and correspondences. But allowed by this attorney to collect the expenses and never once took professional action to improve the subordinate performance or professional courtesy for the services rendered. Overall, I would give this attorney a C- in office protocols and results with the investment I made to his office. I would not recommend using this firm unless you have substantial funds and time to deal with having a subordinate assigned at this attorney’s discretion. If hindsight is 20-20, I would not have allowed this attorney to use me at his discretion assigning an inept junior attorney to my case which I consider unethical behavior. As in any other review system, be aware of five stars and compare to the lower valued one to set the reality of a particular law office. The subordinate will be reviewed separately, and with more issues than stated above…but in due respect will not mention here in name. As noted, reputations may proceed an individual, but that does not substantiate you get what you pay for.I rarely like to issue a review, but in this particular case the attorney used tactics that were questionable in action. The method used for gaining the case was persuasive, and then handed off to a subordinate that was not of the caliber …More

I rarely like to issue a review, but in this particular case the attorney used tactics that were questionable in action. The method used for gaining the case was persuasive, and then handed off to a subordinate that was not of the caliber expected. The case was treated more as a money position and practice for junior lawyers in the firm. This included an inability of the subordinate individual to accomplish the goals of the case and handed off to three other individuals (writing contents) with inconsistent strategies. In addition, the assigned subordinate lawyer had issues with spelling errors, sentence structure, and overall continuity to persuade the courts (including oral arguments) of the validity of the legal claims. The Godfather of the firm serves as a headstone to gain the business but very little evidence or guidance to gain a value added legal strategy. In addition, this attorney agreed in the case, my involvement with reviews, then would change the final documents to the courts. I suspected this situation, and as noted additional documents were also sent to the courts without my review as a paying customer. The difference in the expense of this attorney to a subordinate of course is substantial, but for my case I served more as a training case for the office. The subordinate missed court submissions without my asking, common last minute paperwork, delinquent emails and correspondences. But allowed by this attorney to collect the expenses and never once took professional action to improve the subordinate performance or professional courtesy for the services rendered. Overall, I would give this attorney a C- in office protocols and results with the investment I made to his office. I would not recommend using this firm unless you have substantial funds and time to deal with having a subordinate assigned at this attorney’s discretion. If hindsight is 20-20, I would not have allowed this attorney to use me at his discretion assigning an inept junior attorney to my case which I consider unethical behavior. As in any other review system, be aware of five stars and compare to the lower valued one to set the reality of a particular law office. The subordinate will be reviewed separately, and with more issues than stated above…but in due respect will not mention here in name. As noted, reputations may proceed an individual, but that does not substantiate you get what you pay for.