Houghtaling Wasiura Reviews (%countItem)
Houghtaling Wasiura Rating
Address: 1065 Peck St, Muskegon, Michigan, United States, 49440-1318
Phone: |
Show more...
|
Fax: |
+1 (231) 722-8312 |
Web: |
|
Add contact information for Houghtaling Wasiura
Add new contacts
Chris H represented me for a joint legal custody hearing. He was very unprofessional and I felt like I was doing all of the work. This culminated with him filing the wrong paperwork with the courthouse after losing my case. I have made repeated contact attempts asking him to correct the paperwork and have also attempted to contact his paralegal. No one has contacted me back. He also is attempting to bill me for a court date that he didn't appear at.
Product_Or_Service: Legal Services
Billing Adjustment I want the court date he didn't appear at to be removed from my bill. I also want other consumers to know that he isn't very good at his job and they probably shouldn't waste their money.
Contact Name and Title: Chris A. H
Contact Phone: (231)722-2222
Contact Email: cah***@gmail.com
Our law firm was retained to represent the complainant in a paternity case that was initiated by the State of Michigan. Paternity had been established before she hired the law firm. At the time we were hired the case needed to address parenting time, physical custody and legal custody of an infant. We were hired on January 3, 2018. The complainant had previously appeared as a self-represented litigant with the Muskegon County Friend of the Court. On 12/21/2017 a Consent Judgment of Filiation and Support order entered and ordered that complainant receive temporary legal custody and the issue of legal custody would be referred to a Custody Resolution Conference with the FOC. The CRC was held on March 6, 2018 and the Respondent father failed to attend. The Complainant requested sole legal and physical custody. The case was set for pre-hearing on 4/17/2018 with the Court to review custody, parenting time and child support. In the interim there was a Motion and Order to Show Cause for Complainant denying Respondent father parenting time. There was a second CRC and specific provisions for Respondent-father to follow during his parenting time. The parenting time order from 12/21/2017 was continued. That briefs were prepared and submitted on behalf of Complainant and Respondent. That counsel and the parties appeared and received direction from the Court regarding legal custody where it was made clear to Complainant that the court would not be inclined to continue with Complainant exercising sole legal custody and that the Court would likely be granting the respondent father joint legal custody if he was able to become a citizen of the United States. The respondent father became a US citizen in October 2019. There was correspondence conveyed to Complainant from the attorney for the respondent father requesting the Complainant mother agree to joint legal custody based on the court's prior rulings. The court had determined that Complainant would continue to exercise primary physical custody and the parties would share joint legal custody of the child with the Respondent father exercising specific parenting time to save all involved additional attorney fees. Complainant refused to agree to the proposed change. The father was granted joint legal custody by the court on December 18, 2019. Complainant has persisted with her displeasure with the ruling of the court regarding joint legal custody. Our firm has advocated at every stage of the case, and at all hearings consistent with Complainant's wishes (sole legal custody). At no time was Complainant treated unprofessionally. On 11/20/2019 Counsel appeared and represented Complainant. Counsel appeared on 12/18/2019 and represented Complainant. There were no errors with filing of court documents. Complainant is welcome to obtain new counsel or she may represent herself.
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Since filing my complaint with the Revdex.com I sought consultation with another law firm in the area. I was informed that Mr. H has a reputation for being unreliable and difficult to contact. It was recommended to me that I should file a grievance with the state bar. I have since mailed this grievance with all the proof of my attempts to contact Mr. H and his lack of response to the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission. The only response I have received from him has been in reaction to this Revdex.com complaint. I still don't know what he filed with the court and if it was correct. He never in any way indicated that my case was in danger of being lost. In fact he constantly reassured me that we had a strong case. His partner appeared to court for the November court date. Unfortunately his partner had no knowledge of my case and so he advocated for my court date to be rescheduled. This resulted in my time and money being wasted.
To date, there has been no communication for substitution of counsel with a new lawyer/law firm to replace H *** to represent complainant. In the event another law firm had been retained it is common practice for the new lawyer/firm to send a form for Substitution of Counsel that has been signed by the client and the new attorney. This would permit the substituting attorney/firm to provide representation for Complainant. There has been nothing received on behalf of complainant for substitution of counsel.
Complainant has been provided with a Stipulation and Order for Withdrawal of Attorney so that H *** would no longer represent her in her proceedings. Complainant has failed to sign and return the Stipulation and Order for Withdrawal of Attorney despite email correspondence advising she would do so.
Complainant was informed of the status of the case throughout her representation. Complainant, unfortunately, had unrealistic expectations for her legal position. Complainant did not want to communicate with the father or feel that he could communicate with her. She also did not want the father to have input into the raising of the child.
Complainant did not lose the case - she didn't get what she wanted. The parties, by court order, have joint legal custody, and the complainant has primary physical custody of the minor child. The father was awarded specific parenting time. The court ordered joint legal custody and the complainant has refused to accept the ruling of the court.
An attorney from our firm appeared for the hearing in question. He was prepared for the hearing and advocated on behalf of Complainant. A court order was entered as a result of the hearing. Complainant has been represented by counsel at every stage of the case and her position was zealously advocated. Her position was not accepted by the court and she was ruled against. It is believed that as a result of complainant being unhappy with the ruling of the court, and that she does not want to pay for legal services that were performed has provided the motivation for her filing a complaint with the Revdex.com.
I certainly would never have retained a lawyer to represent me if I was advised that my expectations were "unreasonable." Proof of Mr. H's unprofessionalism can be found in his responses to this complaint. He has gone out of his way to reveal intimate details of my custody case that are in no way relevant to my complaint of his lack of communication and lack of professionalism. I have not refused to pay for any other legal services rendered, despite being billed for time that was spent listening to Mr. H talk about matters unrelated to my case. I simply do not want to pay for a court date that he did not appear to when he could have simply rescheduled or shown up. That November court date was spent trying to catch his partner up on my case. His partner asked for the court date to be rescheduled due to Mr. H not being there and I lost an entire day of PTO for no reason. My complaints against Mr. H are numerous and my main purpose of filing this complaint is to give other consumers realistic expectations for dealing with Mr. H. As I mentioned, I have proof of Mr. H's failure to perform his fiduciary duty and have submitted this to the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission.
Chris H represented me for a joint legal custody hearing. He was very unprofessional and I felt like I was doing all of the work. This culminated with him filing the wrong paperwork with the courthouse after losing my case. I have made repeated contact attempts asking him to correct the paperwork and have also attempted to contact his paralegal. No one has contacted me back. He also is attempting to bill me for a court date that he didn't appear at.
Product_Or_Service: Legal Services
Billing Adjustment I want the court date he didn't appear at to be removed from my bill. I also want other consumers to know that he isn't very good at his job and they probably shouldn't waste their money.
Contact Name and Title: Chris A. H
Contact Phone: (231)722-2222
Contact Email: cah***@gmail.com
Our law firm was retained to represent the complainant in a paternity case that was initiated by the State of Michigan. Paternity had been established before she hired the law firm. At the time we were hired the case needed to address parenting time, physical custody and legal custody of an infant. We were hired on January 3, 2018. The complainant had previously appeared as a self-represented litigant with the Muskegon County Friend of the Court. On 12/21/2017 a Consent Judgment of Filiation and Support order entered and ordered that complainant receive temporary legal custody and the issue of legal custody would be referred to a Custody Resolution Conference with the FOC. The CRC was held on March 6, 2018 and the Respondent father failed to attend. The Complainant requested sole legal and physical custody. The case was set for pre-hearing on 4/17/2018 with the Court to review custody, parenting time and child support. In the interim there was a Motion and Order to Show Cause for Complainant denying Respondent father parenting time. There was a second CRC and specific provisions for Respondent-father to follow during his parenting time. The parenting time order from 12/21/2017 was continued. That briefs were prepared and submitted on behalf of Complainant and Respondent. That counsel and the parties appeared and received direction from the Court regarding legal custody where it was made clear to Complainant that the court would not be inclined to continue with Complainant exercising sole legal custody and that the Court would likely be granting the respondent father joint legal custody if he was able to become a citizen of the United States. The respondent father became a US citizen in October 2019. There was correspondence conveyed to Complainant from the attorney for the respondent father requesting the Complainant mother agree to joint legal custody based on the court's prior rulings. The court had determined that Complainant would continue to exercise primary physical custody and the parties would share joint legal custody of the child with the Respondent father exercising specific parenting time to save all involved additional attorney fees. Complainant refused to agree to the proposed change. The father was granted joint legal custody by the court on December 18, 2019. Complainant has persisted with her displeasure with the ruling of the court regarding joint legal custody. Our firm has advocated at every stage of the case, and at all hearings consistent with Complainant's wishes (sole legal custody). At no time was Complainant treated unprofessionally. On 11/20/2019 Counsel appeared and represented Complainant. Counsel appeared on 12/18/2019 and represented Complainant. There were no errors with filing of court documents. Complainant is welcome to obtain new counsel or she may represent herself.
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Since filing my complaint with the Revdex.com I sought consultation with another law firm in the area. I was informed that Mr. H has a reputation for being unreliable and difficult to contact. It was recommended to me that I should file a grievance with the state bar. I have since mailed this grievance with all the proof of my attempts to contact Mr. H and his lack of response to the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission. The only response I have received from him has been in reaction to this Revdex.com complaint. I still don't know what he filed with the court and if it was correct. He never in any way indicated that my case was in danger of being lost. In fact he constantly reassured me that we had a strong case. His partner appeared to court for the November court date. Unfortunately his partner had no knowledge of my case and so he advocated for my court date to be rescheduled. This resulted in my time and money being wasted.
To date, there has been no communication for substitution of counsel with a new lawyer/law firm to replace H *** to represent complainant. In the event another law firm had been retained it is common practice for the new lawyer/firm to send a form for Substitution of Counsel that has been signed by the client and the new attorney. This would permit the substituting attorney/firm to provide representation for Complainant. There has been nothing received on behalf of complainant for substitution of counsel.
Complainant has been provided with a Stipulation and Order for Withdrawal of Attorney so that H *** would no longer represent her in her proceedings. Complainant has failed to sign and return the Stipulation and Order for Withdrawal of Attorney despite email correspondence advising she would do so.
Complainant was informed of the status of the case throughout her representation. Complainant, unfortunately, had unrealistic expectations for her legal position. Complainant did not want to communicate with the father or feel that he could communicate with her. She also did not want the father to have input into the raising of the child.
Complainant did not lose the case - she didn't get what she wanted. The parties, by court order, have joint legal custody, and the complainant has primary physical custody of the minor child. The father was awarded specific parenting time. The court ordered joint legal custody and the complainant has refused to accept the ruling of the court.
An attorney from our firm appeared for the hearing in question. He was prepared for the hearing and advocated on behalf of Complainant. A court order was entered as a result of the hearing. Complainant has been represented by counsel at every stage of the case and her position was zealously advocated. Her position was not accepted by the court and she was ruled against. It is believed that as a result of complainant being unhappy with the ruling of the court, and that she does not want to pay for legal services that were performed has provided the motivation for her filing a complaint with the Revdex.com.
I certainly would never have retained a lawyer to represent me if I was advised that my expectations were "unreasonable." Proof of Mr. H's unprofessionalism can be found in his responses to this complaint. He has gone out of his way to reveal intimate details of my custody case that are in no way relevant to my complaint of his lack of communication and lack of professionalism. I have not refused to pay for any other legal services rendered, despite being billed for time that was spent listening to Mr. H talk about matters unrelated to my case. I simply do not want to pay for a court date that he did not appear to when he could have simply rescheduled or shown up. That November court date was spent trying to catch his partner up on my case. His partner asked for the court date to be rescheduled due to Mr. H not being there and I lost an entire day of PTO for no reason. My complaints against Mr. H are numerous and my main purpose of filing this complaint is to give other consumers realistic expectations for dealing with Mr. H. As I mentioned, I have proof of Mr. H's failure to perform his fiduciary duty and have submitted this to the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission.