Martinet Law

Worst experience ever got lawyer to handle my dicorce and childsupport in total paid about 7 thousand and for nothing practically paid just so lawyer can do paper work did not get anything back that I had ask for and really didnt fight for me after seeing reviews on lawyer Phillippe m[redacted] realized he had scam alot of people in past, Please dont make same mistake as I did you can just pay maybe 2000 and have someone do paper work for you no need to give away your money for false promises.

Client contracted with

our office on July 30, 2013.  On that

day, our office met with client’s daughter as a result of him being in

custody.  During...

our initial meeting with

client’s daughter, we learned that client had been deported in 1990, but for

unknown reasons.  We also learned that

client was deported again in 2003 as a result of failing to comply with a

20-year ban given to him during his 1990 deportation proceedings.  In 2012, client was caught at the US-Mexican

border, where he was again removed.  At

this time, client elected to designate Mexico as his preferred county of

removal.  In 2013, client was arrested

again.

During our initial

meeting with client’s daughter, we informed her that it would be a battle to

get her father out on bond because of his prior deportations.  Our office explained that for a person in

client’s situation, with his deportation history, getting a bond would take

some time.  We explained to her the

process of filing for bond with DHS because the immigration courts generally do

not give bond to people who have multiple deportations against them.  We explained to client’s daughter that they

needed to be patient in order to get in contact with the right personnel in

order to attempt to secure a bond.  On

August 02, 2013, our office visited client while in custody.  We explained to him the process.  We explained to him what had been explained

to his daughter, that getting a bond would take time.  He offered suggestions on how to work his

immigration case, indicating that he had done the research necessary to get him

a bond.  We appreciated him for his

efforts in researching the law, but explained to him how those laws didn’t

apply to him.  We told him that within

the next 2-3 weeks, we would have a request for bond filed with DHS, since he

was not in immigration proceedings with the court.  After receiving more information from him, we

contacted his daughter in order to secure more evidence to strengthen his bond

request.  On August 14, 2013, we visited

client again, where we discussed the possibility of filing a second asylum

application.  He indicated that he had

already requested asylum, and that he should be receiving an interview

shortly.  We explained to him that if an

asylum officer finds his fear to be reasonable, they will make a request to the

immigration courts to place him into withholding proceedings in order to

determine the validity and credibility of his asylum argument. 

On August 19, 2013, our

office met with client’s daughter.  We

explained to her the process of the asylum application, and requested

additional evidence from her.  After

receiving the evidence needed, we filed the bond request with DHS on August 22,

2013.  The same day we mailed out the

bond request, client had an asylum interview with an asylum officer.  Between August 22, 2013 and October 21, 2013,

our office had numerous office conferences and telephonic conferences with

client’s daughter.  Our office also

visited client, who remained in custody, every 3-4 weeks to discuss the process

of his case.  On every occasion we

visited him, he would attempt to instruct us on how to work his case, where to

file documents, or how to research the laws. 

We would always appreciate his suggestions, but explain to him how the

laws he was trying to use only applied to people in deportation proceedings or

to people who had no prior deportation orders. 

On October 21, 2013, our office sent another request for bond to DHS as

a result of not receiving any response from the first request.  On November 06, 2013, our office met with

client’s daughter.  We allowed her to

review the file.  She saw all the work we

had done up to that point, and apologized for the accusations from her father,

whom she said has a hard time trusting attorneys. 

On November 12, 2013,

our office drafted a third request for bond. 

On November 14, 2013, our office visited client in jail for a fifth

time.  After several accusations of not

doing work in his case, we showed client an entire copy of the file.  We explained to him how we were filing a third

request for bond in person both at the DHS office located in the city where he

was in custody, as well as at the main field office.  We explained that if we did not have a

response within one week, we would send an email to the assistant chief

counsel.  On November 19, 2013, our

office emailed Assistant Chief Counsel of DHS, inquiring as to the delay of

response or action concerning our multiple bond requests.  Our office had begun drafting a motion to reconsider

his case, after having filed a motion to reopen approximately three weeks

earlier.  On November 21, 2013, our

office began the necessary researching and outlining to file a motion to

reconsider.  On November 25, 2013, our

office had another telephonic conference with both client and his daughter.  On December 02, 2013, after having received

numerous confirmations of the work we were doing in this case, client elected

to cancel their contract with our firm. 

Our office performed

approximately $7,400 dollars of work in this case, which was demonstrated to

client and his daughter on numerous occasions. 

Both client and his daughter reviewed the work that was being done on

their case.  Every time client’s daughter

came to the office, she was given access to the file to review the

documentation filed on her father’s behalf. 

As client’s daughter indicated, they only paid our office $4,500.  Although they owed our office almost $3,000

for work provided on her father’s behalf, our office elected to not charge them

that money, as a result of them being dissatisfied with the results, although

said results were explained as a possibility to them when they first contracted

with our office on July 30, 2013.  

Thank you in advance,

Legal Assistant / Non-Attorney

MARTINET LAW

Worst experience ever got lawyer to handle my dicorce and childsupport in total paid about 7 thousand and for nothing practically paid just so lawyer can do paper work did not get anything back that I had ask for and really didnt fight for me after seeing reviews on lawyer Phillippe m[redacted] realized he had scam alot of people in past, Please dont make same mistake as I did you can just pay maybe 2000 and have someone do paper work for you no need to give away your money for false promises.