• Report: #1044337

Complaint Review: THOMAS J. HILLGARDNER, ESQ.

Thank You

Read how Ripoff Report saves consumers millions.

  • Submitted: Thu, April 18, 2013
  • Updated: Thu, July 03, 2014

  • Reported By: Tenant Protection Services — New York New York
THOMAS J. HILLGARDNER, ESQ.
82-63 170th Street Jamaica, New York United States of America

THOMAS J. HILLGARDNER, ESQ. Tenant Protection Services, Thomas J. Hillgardner violates DR 2-103, solicitation of client in Court, abandonment, mistreatment Jamaica, New York

*Author of original report: AGAIN HILLGARDNER LOSES IN COURT

*Author of original report: HILLGARDER FAILS IN SURROGATE COURT

*Author of original report: More Evidence of Hillgardner's Bad Character

*Author of original report: HILLGARDNER EJECTED FROM COURT

*Author of original report: HILLGARDNER LOSES YET AGAIN IN COURT

*Author of original report: HILLGARDNER LOSES YET AGAIN

*Author of original report: ANOTHER PERSON BELIEVES HILLGARDNER MENTALLY ILL

*Author of original report: HILLGARDNER HARMS HIS OWN CLIENT

*Author of original report: HILLGARDNER LOSSES YET AGAIN IN COURT

*Author of original report: Hillgardner Arrested Twice for Harassing Behavior

What's this?
What's this?
What's this?
Is this
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™

SEO Reputation Management at its best!

**If Mr. Hillgardner has harmed you, contact TenantProtection for help.** 

SUMMARY:

THOMAS J. HILLGARDNER, ESQ. VIOLATES DR 2-103 under Porter vs. NYC Housing Authority Index No. 017424/11 (Queens) by soliciting the client/Plaintiff in Court. Plaintiff then claims Hillgardner abandoned her and mistreated her and her son while she and her son were living in a family shelter.

DETAILS: 

A complaint has been filed with Tenant Protection Services against Mr. Hillgardner by a former client for his solicitation of the client in Court, abandonment and for mistreatment. The Disciplinary Committee is being informed and an attorney is being hired to determine whether there is a claim for legal malpractice. [continued below]....
..... Mr. Hillgardner knew that his former client and her sone were living in a family shelter and her lawsuit was to get her and her son back into an apartment she lived in for the last 29 years and for damages.

The Disciplinary rules read as follows:

DR 2-103 [1200.08] Solicitation and Recommendation of Professional Employment.A. A lawyer shall not engage in solicitation: 1.by in-person or telephone contact, or by real-time or interactive computer-accessed communication unless the recipient is a close friend, relative, former client or existing clientNY DR 7-101(A)(1) further states that a lawyer shall not intentionally . . . fail to seek the lawful objectives of [his or her] client through reasonably available means permitted by law and the Disciplinary Rules. NY DR 7-101(A)(3) prohibits a lawyer from intentionally . . . prejudic[ing] or damag[ing] [his or her] client during the course of the relationship. Referring link: http://www.law.cornell.edu/ethics/ny/narr/NY_NARR_1_03.HTM 


COMPLAINT AGAINST THOMAS HILLGARDNER BY FORMER CLIENT:

April 15, 2013Reference:

Mr. Hillgardner

Mr. Mehmet, As per our conversation on 4/10/13 when I emailed you about seeking another lawyer, I am stating my case briefly to you so can help me.On June 14, 2010 I was in Civil Court for a Travis Hearing to be reinstated back to my home of 29years, when I was called in for the hearing was first when I came across Mr. Hillgardner. Before I went into the hearing Mr. Hillgardner approached me and asked me could he sit in on my hearing and that he was an Attorney. At the time I was
very distressed, confused and did not think twice about Mr. Hillgardner sitting in on my hearing since he presented himself to me as an Attorney. After the hearing I had to return after lunch for the decision. After I won the decision he asked me could he represent me as his client. I had agreed to him being my Attorney because I did not know any better at the time.

Since June 14, 2010 he became my Attorney and I thought that he was going to represent me in a professional manner. During the first year I had many problems with getting in contact with him, and when I did he seemed to be very disrespectful most of the time. He talked very nasty to me and my son on numerous of occasion. I lived at the time from one family relative to another until March 2011. Due to the seriousness of me being homeless I was unable to deal with anyone especially my Attorney that made me feel worse than I did. By May of 2011 he pushed me to the limit and I decided not to call him for awhile. I stopped calling October 2011 up until December 2012 a little over a year later. I have not heard anything from him for nothing. The last time I heard from him was when I was waiting to hear from an Appeal from Supreme Applet Courts.

When I called him December 2012 he stated, Ms. Porter I was just thinking of you, I just got the decision for your Civil Court Case and you won the decision. He also stated, That something was wrong with his phone back in July of 20112 and he could not contact me. I did not understand because I still have the same number and I never received a call from him nor did I get a missed called neither. OK, I felt that all was water under the bridge something good is about to happen with my case. Still his attitude was rude and unbearable to deal with for me and my son. So when he hung up the phone on me this time I decided to GOOGLE him to find out what kind of Attorney record he has and only then I realized that I made the biggest mistake by signing a retainer with him. I also found out on March 28, 2013 that my Supreme Court case was removed of the calendar because when I was called to appear in Court sometime in July of 2012 he (when I decided because of his disrespectful manner not to call him) never contact me until I called him in December 2012.

He stated to me that he was putting a motion into the court and I was to wait for his call the week of April 8. 2013 and he did not called me. When I called him April 10, 2013 he was very disrespectful to me and told me, you are not paying me any money. I stated, Why would you say that when I signed a retainer so you would get paid. He stated, I can not call him when ever I wanted to and expect him to talk to me, and if I do not like what he is saying then I can find another Attorney. Besides you get more from a person being sweet as honey bees, than sour like vinegar. He then hung up the phone and I have not heard anything from him since then. I only called him because he never returned my call and it is important to speak with him ASAP to get my case back on the calendar.PLEASE HELP me I have a case in Civil Court with Judge Badio for NYCH to restore me back into a place. I am currently living in a family shelter for 2 years and need to get out.. I also have a Supreme Court case for damages that I need to be restored back to the calendar. I can be reached anytime at 347 617 1187. I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Thank You, 

CASE LAW:

Referring Link: http://www.law.cornell.edu/ethics/ny/narr/NY_NARR_1_03.HTM

Running Afoul of a Statute of Limitations: See In re Gajewski, 217 A.D.2d 90, 634 N.Y.S.2d 704 (1st Dept. 1995) (lawyer suspended for one year for, among other neglectful behavior, allowing the statute of limitations to expire on a case).

Ignoring Pleadings: See Gigliotti v. Morasco, 2 A.D.2d 653, 152 N.Y.S.2d 45 (4th Dept. 1956) (court opined that a lawyer who was so dilatory as to ignore a bill of particulars until a motion to preclude is made might subject himself to disciplinary proceedings.)

Duty of Diligence Continues Despite Non-Payment of Attorneys Costs: See, e.g.,In re Pines, 26 A.D.2d 424, 275 N.Y.S.2d 122 (1st Dept. 1966) (clients failure to reimburse attorney for disbursements did not excuse attorneys failure to prosecute personal injury action for over 3 years).

Delegation of Responsibility: Kleeman v. Rheingold, 81 N.Y.2d 270, 598 N.Y.S.2d 149 (1993): Under DR 6-101, an attorney cannot delegate the duty to exercise care in handling a clients legal matter. Accordingly, an attorney cannot escape liability for negligent service of process by delegating that task to an independent process server.

Neglect: Matter of Sorid, 189 A.D.2d 377, 596 N.Y.S.2d 125 (2nd Dept. 1993): An attorney violated DR 6-101 by failing to forward a settlement check to a client for two months, failing to retrieve file in an estate matter after a former employee removed it from the attorneys offices, and by failing to probate an estate within four years. See also In re Lowenthal, 132 A.D.2d 117, 521 N.Y.S.2d 721 (2d Dept. 1987), appeal dismissed, 71 N.Y.2d 888 (1988)(lawyer that violated DR 6-101(A)(3) by neglecting an estate matter for more than seven years was suspended for two years for this and various other rules violations).

Family Problems No Excuse For Neglect: Matter of Sexton, 231 A.D.2d 832, 647 N.Y.S.2d 587 (3d Dept 1996) (acknowledging that attorneys must attend to their clients interest punctually and with vigor despite distracting and stressful intrusions from personal and family problems or advise their clients of their option to obtain other counsel and suspending neglectful counsel for 6 months).

Illness Not an Excuse: Matter of Whitbread, 183 A.D.2d 347, 591 N.Y.S.2d 117 (4th Dept. 1992) (Under DR 6-101, an attorneys illness and divorce do not justify the attorneys neglect of legal matters and abandonment of clients. Sanction: Suspended for one year).

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 04/18/2013 12:49 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/THOMAS-J-HILLGARDNER-ESQ/Jamaica-New-York-10012/THOMAS-J-HILLGARDNER-ESQ-Tenant-Protection-Services-Thomas-J-Hillgardner-violates-DR-1044337. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.

Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.

Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on THOMAS J. HILLGARDNER, ESQ.

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Search Tips
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
10Author 0Consumer 0Employee/Owner
Updates & Rebuttals

#1 Author of original report

AGAIN HILLGARDNER LOSES IN COURT

AUTHOR: David - ()

HILLGARDNER LOSES AGAIN IN COURT

 

On August 22, 2014, an Order was entered from Judge Debra Rose Samuels that DENIED Hillgardner's request to VACATE a settlement agreement his ex-girlfriend, Ruth Baumann, signed on May 6, 2013 for her physically assaulting someone. Hillgardner foolishly filed a DUPLICATE claim in BOTH the Supreme Court and the Civil Court. He then filed a separate motion and attached the settlement agreement as an Exhibit, which WAIVED his ex-girlfriends rights to the confidentiality clause. There are NO words to explain the stupidity of those filings. I do NOT think a first year law student would even make such a fundamental legal error. Hillgardner is one of the worst attorneys I have ever met in my 24 year legal career hands down. What makes his loss here worse is that a PARALEGAL DEFEATED HILLGARDNER. Imagine what a seasoned attorney could do to him. 

 

Mehmet v. Baumann Index No. CV-064682-11/NY

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 Author of original report

HILLGARDER FAILS IN SURROGATE COURT

AUTHOR: David - ()

HILLGARDNER FAILS IN COURT AGAIN

On August 13, 2014, Hillgardner appeared in the Surrogate Court to push his and his ex-girlfriend's, Ruth Baumann, ridiculous and meritless claims. The Court REJECTED his papers because they were defective. Hillgardner had NO experience in Surrogate Court and as an attorney, he was ignorant on how to file papers correctly in that Court. A good lawyer would have NEVER made such a fundamental filing error. An error like that could cause someone to lose their case before it even got started. 

In the matter of Chambi New York County Docket No. 4450/B/12

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#3 Author of original report

More Evidence of Hillgardner's Bad Character

AUTHOR: David - ()

MORE EVIDENCE OF HILLGARDNER'S BAD CHARACTER

In 1995, hillgardner was representing the Defendant in a hold-over action under H.E.G. v. Melvin L&T Index 87335/95. He uncovered that the Plaintiff landlord's corporate filing had dissolved. He then got his girlfriend, Ruth Baumann, to incorporate the same name as the Plaintiff landlord, H.E.G.. He then represented his girlfriend under the H.E.G name in Supreme Court and sued the Plaintiff landlord claiming it was using the name of his girlfriend's company and he asked for an injunction to stop the landlord from suing Melvin in the L&T Court.  Hillgardner LOST because he could NOT understand the legal concept and rights of a "de facto corporation". HOWEVER, this further uncovers the disgusting bad character of Hillgardner besides the fact that he is a bad lawyer who has trouble understanding fundamental legal concepts as in a de facto corporation. A good lawyer would have understood the legal rights of a de facto corporation and the lawyer would have NEVER sued for an injunction because the lawsuit would have failed as it did with Hillgardner. 

Plaintiff Landlord
#1 H.E.G. Development & Management Corp. v. Patricia Melvin L&T Index 87335/95

Ruth Baumann (Hillgardner's girlfriend at that time
#2 H.E.G Development & Management Corp. v. Naomi Blumberg 656 N.Y.S.2d 127

NOTE: Naomi Blumberg was the original owner of H.E.G and they sued her for using her own company name after they incorporated an identical company name.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#4 Author of original report

HILLGARDNER EJECTED FROM COURT

AUTHOR: David - ()

HILLGARDNER EJECTED FROM COURTROOM

On May 7, 2014, Hillgardner was ejected from Judge Spears' Courtroom by two (2) Court Officers. Hillgardner lost control and started to scream at the Judge and he started insulting her by telling her she did not know what she was doing. In fact, it was Hillgardner who had NO grasp of the legal concepts and was illogically and incorrectly arguing the law. He got his client hit with a default judgment and he failed to submit an affidavit of Merit from a person with personal knowledge in his motion to vacate the default. Hillgardner clearly has a mental issue that needs to be addressed by the Disciplinary Committee. He is harming his clients by bad lawyering. 

26 Bond St. Mngt, LLC v. Baumann Index No. 065389/12 (Civil, NY)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#5 Author of original report

HILLGARDNER LOSES YET AGAIN IN COURT

AUTHOR: David - ()

Hillgardner Loses Yet Again in Court


On March 20, 2014, Hillgardner appeared before Judge Spears within the Manhattan Housing Court on a frivolous Motion for a Protective Order on discovery he filed. Judge Spears could NOT even understand the oral argument he was making on his motion because as she stated it made NO sense. In fact, the logic of Hillgardner's argument was so fundamentally distorted and so absurd in the face of the facts and evidence that the opposing attorneys believed Hillgardner was mentally ill. Judge Spears obviously DENIED Hillgardner's frivolous motion. 

26 Bond St. Mngt, LLC v. Baumann Index No. 065389/12

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#6 Author of original report

HILLGARDNER LOSES YET AGAIN

AUTHOR: David - ()

HILLGARDNER LOSSES YET AGAIN

On December 24, 2013, the Executrix's attorney in a NYC Surrogate Court matter No. 2012-4450 DENIED Hillgardner's claims for his client on the grounds that Hillgardner FAILED to submit a verified Notice of Claim and that there was NO privity of contract with the Estate. And Hillgardner wrongly mailed the Notice to the estate's attorney instead of to the Executrix as required. Hillgardner's defects are on the level of legal malpractice. They are fundamental issues taught in law school that any good attorney would have and should have known except for Hillgardner. 

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#7 Author of original report

ANOTHER PERSON BELIEVES HILLGARDNER MENTALLY ILL

AUTHOR: David - ()

ANOTHER PERSON BELIEVES HILLGARDNER MENTALLY ILL

On December 10, 2013, a personal assistant for the Petitioner, appeared before Judge Halprin in the NY Housing Court to just inform the Judge that the Petitioner's attorney had been held up in another Court house and he needed an adjournment. Hillgardner started arguing with the Judge again to refuse the adjournment. The Judge called his argument ridiculous and gave the adjournment. Hillgardner then chased and harassed the personal assistant in the hallway. She stated that she believes Hillgardner maybe mentally ill. This is now five (5) professional people who think Hillgardner maybe mentally ill. I think that Mr. Hillgardner should be professionally evaluated by a doctor before being allowed to continue practicing law.

Chanbi v. Baumann Index No. 111569/2010

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#8 Author of original report

HILLGARDNER HARMS HIS OWN CLIENT

AUTHOR: David - ()

 
HILLGARDNER HARMS HIS OWN CLIENT

On December 11, 2013, Hillgardner harmed his client by failing to confirm her deposition. Judge Halprin Ordered Hillgardner's ex-girl friend and client, Ruth Bauamnn, to produce discovery for the second time and to appear for her deposition. Hillgardner failed to confirm the deposition to allow opposing counsel to hire the court reporter. Hillgardner just showed up on a cold day in Queens unannounced with his client and he was sent back. He started arguing and screaming at the Petitioner's attorney in his office. The Petitioner's attorney was prepared to call the POLICE if Hillgardner continued to shout and refused to leave.

Chambi v. Baumann Index No. 111569/2010
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#9 Author of original report

HILLGARDNER LOSSES YET AGAIN IN COURT

AUTHOR: David - ()

HILLGARDNER LOSES YET AGAIN IN COURT

On November 4, 2013, Judge Halprin of the NY Civil Court DENIED Hillgardner's motion for reargument and scolded him by telling him to stop showing off to his client and to the court. Hillgardner started arguing with the judge. He said he would appeal. But the Appellate Term cannot grant a stay on an Interim Order only Final Orders. Thus,the Order for discovery will result in a Motion to Preclude if he defaults again.

Chambi v. Baumann Index No. 111569/2010 (Civil NY)

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#10 Author of original report

Hillgardner Arrested Twice for Harassing Behavior

AUTHOR: David - ()

HILLGARDNER WAS ARRESTED TWICE FOR HARASSING BEHAVIOR

Hillgardner has been arrested two (2) times for engaging in harassing behavior against a police officer and a Court officer. Thus, the claims from the seasoned attorneys that Hillgardner may have a mental illness could be justified by the facts. I have never heard of an attorney being arrested for this kind of conduct before. It is highly unusual and it may certainly disclose that he may be mentally disturbed. 

ATTORNEYS CLAIM HILLGARDNER IS MENTALLY UNSTABLE

On September 23, 2013, two (2) seasoned attorneys who opposed Hillgardner in oral arguments before Judge Love in Queens mentioned that they believed Hillgardner had some sort of mental illness. Hillgardner has exhibited erratic behavior in Court. He repeatedly talks and laughs to himself when no one is standing next to him. A third seasoned attorney who opposed Hillgardner in another case under Porter v. NYC in Queens informed me that the Judge in that case had to call over the Court Officer to claim Hillgardner down. This was my exact experience with Hillgardner in Mehmet v. Baumann in the New York county Civil Court. The Court Officer approached Hillgardner in my case and told Hillgardner to calm down and to control his behavior. 

Hillgardner v. Chambi 008274/10 (Queens)

HILLGARDNER LOSES AGAIN!

On September 23, 2013, Judge Love of the Queens Civil Court DENIED Hillgardner's motion to amend the complaint on fundamental grounds (The main motion was dismissed; but Hillgardner knowingly filed a cross-motion under the dismissed motion). Any good attorney would have NEVER filed a cross-motion under a dismissed motion. It makes it fundamentally defective requiring dismissal. Hillgardner could not even understand this issue.

Hillgardner v. Chambi 008274/10 (Queens)

HILLGARDNER LOSES YET AGAIN

On August 1, 2013, Hillgardner appeared in the "submission part" for a motion to vactate a default. He foolishly asked the Court clerk to give him a 45 day adjournment so he could mail Judge Oing a "LETTER MOTION". Every good lawyer knows you have to make a motion via the Motion Support Dept. and pay the $45 fee (His request to dismiss the defamation claim against him was denied).

Mehmet v. Hillgardner Index# 103282/10

HILLGARDNER LOSES AGAIN

Judge Halprin on or about July 8, 2013 issued an Order denying Hillgardner's motion to dismiss and demanding that his ex-girlfriend produce discovery. He filed a motion for re-argument; but it can be easily defeated. He does not know that one of New York's best L&T law firms is about to take over this case (He lost this case when it was filed. He just does not realize it yet because he is unfamiliar with L&T law).

Mehmet v. Baumann Index No. 065389/12

HILLGARDNER SETTLES THE ASSAULT AND BATTERY

The lawsuit filed against Hillgardner's ex-girlfriend, Ruth Baumann, for assault and battery has been settled amicably in my favor. Mr. Hillgardner and his ex-girlfriend wanted the "terms" of the settlement to be confidential.

Mehmet v. Baumann Index No. 64682/11

HILLGARDNER FAILS TO FILE NOTE OF ISSUE

This homeless tenant who was kicked out of her house with her son without being served with a Notice of Eviction was wrongly solicited in court by Hillgardner. She won a contempt order against the housing authority; but Hillgardner caused her Supreme Court case to be dismissed by failing to TIMELY file the Note of Issue. He did NOT file a motion to vacate the dismissal as of today.

Porter vs. NYC Housing Authority Index No. 017424/11 (Queens)

HILLGARDNER VIOLATES DR 2-103 (Client Solicitation in Court)

A complaint has been filed with Tenant Protection Services against Mr. Hillgardner by a former client for solicitation in Court, abandonment and mistreatment. The Disciplinary Committee is being informed and an attorney is being hired to determine whether there is a claim for legal malpractice. If Mr. Hillgardner has harmed you, contact TenantProtection dott org

Porter vs. NYC Housing Authority Index No. 017424/11 (Queens)

AND YET AGAIN HILLGARNER LOSES

On February 13, 2013, the New York City Loft Board REJECTED Hillgardner's ridiculous and foolish letter that claimed a landlord failed to comply with their Order No. 2135 and 2271 when the building plans clearly showed compliance

HILLGARDNER LOSES YET AGAIN!

On January 8, 2013, Judge Rakower immediately signed an Order denying

Hillgardner's re-argument motion she received that same day. The Judge rejected his ridiculous and flawed arguments. About 95% of the legal arguments that defeated him were drafted by a paralegal. It is my opinion that Hillgardner is a very bad lawyer. At times, his arguments are unintelligible.

Chanbi v. Baumann Index No. 111569/2010

HILLGARDNER KEEPS LOSING IN COURT

On Sep. 7, 2012, Judge Eileen A. Rakower denied Hillgardners motion to dismiss the lawsuit against his ex-girlfriend (Baumann) and she granted the cross-motion against his ex-girlfriend that was drafted by a paralegal.

Mehmet v. Baumann Index No. 111569/10

AND YET AGAIN HILLGARDNER LOSES ANOTHER MOTION

Judge Schrieber of the Housing Court is denying Hillgardner's motion to dismiss the Holdover action against his ex-girlfriend Buamann. Hillgrardner could NOT even understand the legal theory of primary residence even after the Judge informed him about the element of "actual living purposes". He foolishly argued primary residence with succession rights when they cannot co-exist.Paralegal's papers defeated him

Mehmet v. Baumann Index No. 065389/12

AND AGAIN HILLGARDNER LOSES ANOTHER MOTION IN COURT

On Aug. 29, 2012, Hillgardner again lost to a paralegal. He lost his motion to strike and his request to examine the plaintiff's clothing on the sidewalk in front of his girlfriend's apartment. The judge called him "RIDICULOUS". Hillgardner started arguing with the Judge and said he would appeal that decision too. The Court Officer had to quiet him down.

Mehmet v. Baumann Index No. 64682/11

HILLGARDNER LOSSES AGAIN

MEHMET, B. DAVID vs. HILLGARDNER, THOMAS J.

I told you that it would be proven that Hillgardner committed defamation. He lost his motion to dismiss the lawsuit against him for defamation. The case goes to trial. BTW, he re-published the same defamatory letter to someone else a couple of weeks ago. The judge has requested that the Plaintiff file a motion to amend the complaint to add this new defamation charge.

HILLGARDNER'S EX-GIRLFRIEND, RUTH BUAMANN, WAS SUED FOR ASSAULT

Hillgardner actually gave his ex-girlfriend papers in court to serve in the lawsuit filed against him. She then ran like a crazy woman through the courthouse screaming and hitting the person she was suppose to serve on the chest so hard that the plastic edge of the binder punctured his skin. A police report was filed with the fifth precinct and she was sued in the NY Civil Court under Mehmet v. Baumann Index No. 064682/11

GEICO ATTORNEY ACCUSES HILLGARDNER OF HARASSMENT

This nut Hillgardner was accused of harassing a GEICO attorney:

“This is Leah Chipkin. Never mind. I do not represent you anymore. You represented yourself in this case. It was a whole big deal. You didn't want to be represented by inhouse counsel to GEICO. So, I am going to call Tom Hillgardner and tell him that this case is no longer with me and to not harass me again.”

Respond to this report!
What's this?
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.



Ripoff Report Legal Directory