- Report: #1043867
Report - Rebuttal - Arbitrate
Complaint Review: Tenant Protection Services
Tenant Protection Services26 Bond Street New York, New York United States of America
Tenant Protection Services Thomas J. Hillgardner violates DR 2-103, solicitation of client in Court, abandonment, mistreatment New York, New York
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
Click here now..
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.
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. 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. 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.
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 04/16/2013 11:28 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Tenant-Protection-Services/New-York-New-York-10012/Tenant-Protection-Services-Thomas-J-Hillgardner-violates-DR-2-103-solicitation-of-clien-1043867. 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.
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:Search Tips
In order to assure the best results in your search:
- Keep the name short & simple, and try different variations of the name.
- Do not include ".com", "S", "Inc.", "Corp", or "LLC" at the end of the Company name.
- Use only the first/main part of a name to get best results.
- Only search one name at a time if Company has many AKA's.