• Report: #1044353
Complaint Review:

Attorney Bruce E. Burdick - Burdick Law Center

  • Submitted: Thu, April 18, 2013
  • Updated: Sat, April 20, 2013

  • Reported By: Blogger —
Attorney Bruce E. Burdick - Burdick Law Center
3832 Omega Street Alton, Illinois United States of America

Attorney Bruce E. Burdick - Burdick Law Center Attorney Bruce E. Burdick - Burdick Law Center Attorney Bruce E. Burdick - Burdick Law Center Attorney Bruce E. Burdick - Burdick Law Center Alton, Illinois

*REBUTTAL Owner of company: Further rebuttal

*REBUTTAL Individual responds: You owe Attorney Natoli an apology.

*Author of original report: Delete Entire Post

*REBUTTAL Owner of company: FOR THE RECORD

*REBUTTAL Individual responds: Defamatory posting

*Author of original report: Attorney Frank Anthony Natoli

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!

Attorney Bruce E. Burdick is a deranged lawyer on the legal website avvo.com he multi-state dispenses radical political opinion in place of legal advice. Case in point Attorney Bruce Burdick told a female that reported that someone wrote they want to forcible rape her that she can do nothing and dismissed her failing to advised her to report it to the local police.

Attorney Bruce E. Burdick uses avvo.com to advance his maniacal political opinion to those seeking legitimate advice.

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 04/18/2013 01:39 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/attorney-bruce-e-burdick-burdick-law-center/alton-illinois-62002/attorney-bruce-e-burdick-burdick-law-center-attorney-bruce-e-burdick-burdick-law-cen-1044353. 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. READ: Foreign websites steal our content

Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on Attorney Bruce E. Burdick - Burdick Law Center

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?
2Author 0Consumer 4Employee/Owner
Updates & Rebuttals

#1 REBUTTAL Owner of company

Further rebuttal

AUTHOR: burdlaw1 - ()

After sleeping on this, I realized Attorney Natoli would not post something like that and that he, like me is just a victim of a false report. I overreacted to what I thought was an attack from a colleague, and for that I am sorry. Attorney Natoli is a fine lawyer and is delightful, not delusional. We have interacted on www.Avvo.com for months and his answers have been excellent and I have recommended and will continue to recommend him, especially for startup business and Internet law issues. Being a pianist and actor, he is also quite good at Entertainment Law. Attorney Natoli graciously called me to ask what this was all about and I have spoken to him at length and I have no dispute with him. This was a false report, which also attacked him and falsely listed him as "Author", presumably to bait me for a hostile reply, which I unfortunately fell for and just made things worse. My apologies to attorney Natoli for the angst I displayed. We are both just positing answers on Avvo on our free time as a courtesy to potential new clients and distressed individuals, mostly as a public service. If RipOffReport was a more reputable site it would just delete all of this entire thread, but that is not the ROR model, which appears to be built allowing defamatory posts and then selling reputation repair services to the victims.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 REBUTTAL Individual responds

You owe Attorney Natoli an apology.

AUTHOR: burdlaw1 - ()

"O, what a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive!" -Walter Scott

As you know, ripoff report does not remove postings so I will hold you fully accountable for what you set motion with your defamatory post. However, I doubt it amounts to a hill of beans in long term effect, as it was so obviously false.

You have defamed both me and attorney Natoli, when both of us were donating our expertiese and time freely on Avvo.com as a public service.

In the future please take your anger out on the proper target, which is the extortion mugshots sites not an excellent attorney like Frank Natoli. Fortunately for all concerned he reacted calmly and professionally. I wish I had done the same, and I see you now do, also. I have apologized to him and you should, too!
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#3 Author of original report

Delete Entire Post

AUTHOR: Blogger - ()

Possible emotions were running high and maybe things were misinterpreted. I think bygones should be bygones as the original poster I want the entire post completely deleted.

Delete Entire Post

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#4 REBUTTAL Owner of company


AUTHOR: Legal Refugee - ()

My Name is Frank A. Natoli, Esq. and I just wanted comment here to state that I am not the author of this content. I did not post the above statements about Mr. Bruce Burdick and I have no idea why anyone would do so.

While some of my public comments taken from an Avvo.com response were pasted here, some of them are in fact out of context. The issue presented had to do with removing picutres from a mugshot website and I offering insights regards to that matter.

Thank you.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#5 REBUTTAL Individual responds

Defamatory posting

AUTHOR: burdlaw1 - ()

Attorney Natoli, in a delusional fit of baseless rage, has posted a defamatory report, false and misleading about me.

Contrary to the report, I am a sensible and sane patent attorney with 40 years experience [34 years more than Attorney Natoli, by the way] and I did not give the advice claimed, Attorney Natoli did. What I told the lady in question was that she could not sue the Department of Justice, the Department of Corrections, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers or the Mecklenburg North Carolina sheriff for posting her mugshot but that she might have a claim against the mugshot extortion site where the offending comments appeared below her picture. Her question was could she sue the law enforcement agencies for posting her mugshot, not could she report the offending comments to the police. She said she had already "reported" the posting to the police. I also told her that I though she had a claim against the website involved (www.gotbusted.net, one of the "mugshots.com" type sites which try to extract money in return for removing mugshots copied from public records) but that she would have a hard time tracking down the owners because the site was registered through an anonymizing service.

Attorney Natoli is delusional. His case in point was a lady who posted this:
"Can I sue the DOJ, DOC, ICANN and the Sheriff's for posting my mugshot online? I reported a site for stealing my picture which they posted on their site and graphically describe how they want to rape me."
Note that the lady already "reported" it to the police. So Attorney Natoli is incensed that I did not tell her to do something she said she had already done.

The asker gave the link to the actual page on the www.gotbusted.net site (I won't identify her  picture, but you can go to the site to see the sort of disgusting inexcusable comments appear under nearly every picture), where her picture was and a comment about what some commenter wanted to do to her, along with many other pictures, each with similar comments, including even guys. I don't give the link, as I do not like or support such websites. Of course suit could be filed but never one against law enforcement as posting mugshots is legal and law enforcement does not have anything to do with the comments on www.gotbusted.net.

So, with that in mind, what is the "deranged maniacal political" post I made (you decide if it is deranged or not) -remember the question was could she sue the Dept. of Justice, the Dept. of Corrections, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, and the Sheriff for making a public record ---public. Here is exactly what I said:
"Well you can sue a monkey for a banana if you
want, but can you win? No, your mugshot is a public record. The site
apparently allows such comments to increase the pressure on those whose
pictures are posted to remove them, which is how the site makes money. I
think this site has potential liability for the improper control they
exercise over comments. However, I think you will have great difficulty
locating the principals behind the site, as the domain is registered as
Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 012492256, that is through an anonymizing
service. The agencies you list have no culpability here."

[the agencies being DOJ, DOC, ICANN & Sheriff] and Attorney Natoli expressly agreed with me, also telling the lady "tough luck" there was nothing she could do and failing to tell her to report it to the police. Yes, he is guilty of not doing what he now accuses me falsely of not doing. (But unlike me, he just flat failed with no excuse, because he apparently does not realize she already reported this to the police, while I instead did read the question and did realize she had already reported the comments and so I did the most sensible thing, which is not telling someone to do what she said she had already done. Apparently Attorney Natoli does not read questions thoroughly before flying off the handle.)

Remember, he agreed with me. Here was his answer, agreeing with mine:

"This unfortunately falls under the category
of tough luck... I hope that there will soon be some kind of remedy to
this kind of activity but until then it becomes near impossible to do
anything about. As Mr. Burdick notes, the operators are likely not even
stateside and even if they are you have to uncover their identities.
It may be worth paying the fee to remove it for your own sanity, but I agree I would have a hard time with that on principle.
Best regards,
Natoli-Lapin, LLC"

So, who was it that told her "tough luck" she could do nothing? Ooops, it was Attorney Natoli. And he even suggested she reward the site by paying them money ("It may be worth paying the fee to remove it..."]. Attorney Naoli said in a further comment:
"I would have a hard time sending these thugs money anyway but this is a
tight spot. We know for certain that if she doesn't pay this pic will
remain on the site. . . .."

Apparently he is mad because I later pointed out the folly of his recommending, reluctantly, that she send them money, as these sites (and there are several), are likely in cooperation, so that if you pay one to remove your picture, it tends to just appear on the others, which quickly learn they have someone who pays. My words were:
". . . . If one site gets paid, they probably own three more
that will know they "have a live one" able and willing to possibly pay.
Paying is often a ticket to having your photo on even more sites. But
this one I think crosses a line in allowing such unmoderated obscene
comments in order to better extort you."

So, unlike Attorney Natoli who told her "tough luck" and "pay", I was actually saying (for the second time) there is a claim if the owner of the site could be found".  Funny how defamatory postings sometimes come back to bite you isn't it! Unlike Attorney Natoli, I won't defame a fellow attorney. After 40 years of practice I have no need for such slimy tactics, for whatever delusional purpose they were made by Attorney Natoli.

I know Attorney Natoli never contacted me to express concern before blasting off a defamatory ripoffreport.

As far as the defamatory statement that I have maniacal political views (Attorney Natoli does not even know my political views) it's ridiculous to think I am deranged or have maniacal political opinions, unless President Obama is presumed to be deranged and have maniacal political opinions. I share many of his opinions and have supported him since he first announced years ago in Springfield, IL one cold February day that he was running for President. However, I seldom, if ever, express political views on Avvo, and I note Attorney Natoli cites nothing to back up such false and defamatory statements. I think Attorney Natoli is thinking of my brother Dwight who has very extreme political views or my sister Penny who is ultra liberal. Again, he fails to exercise even a modicum of diligence in researching his postings.

In fact, despite over 3000 answers on Avvo (more than 3 times as many as Attorney Natoli), of which 2200 have been agreed by other attorneys (more than 3 times as many as Attorney Natoli), there are no complaints to Avvo that have ever been reported to me, including with reference to the one Attorney Natoli has all wrong.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#6 Author of original report

Attorney Frank Anthony Natoli

AUTHOR: Blogger - ()

Best comment goes to Lawyer Frank Anthony Natoli of Natoli-Lapin, LLC
304 Park Ave S Fl 11, New York, NY 10010
(212) 537-4436

Rape: "This unfortunately falls under the category of tough luck..."

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?
Ripoff Report Recommends
ZipBooks Accounting Software

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.