Owner response
This, and the other reviews to which I attach this reply, were not written by former clients. They were written at the direction (via public Instagram video) of an individual using the moniker “James the Barber”, the purported cousin of my former client, Mr. Edin Enamorado. They were published as part of an effort to strong-arm and defame me when Mr. Enamorado breached his contract in an effort to receive free legal services, and are now the subject of a pending defamation lawsuit. However, I have spent a decade amassing my reputation, and will provide a brief interim response.<br><br>Mr. Enamorado, was one of 8 co-defendants, charged in a case out of Victorville, which garnered significant media attention. I was contracted to represent Mr. Enamorado based on his observation of my earlier in-court representation of his co-defendant, Ms. Vanessa Carrasco, whose case resolved favorably, and who has valiantly and kindly posted her own 5-star review of my performance in this thread.<br><br>Mr. Enamorado’s case was in my estimation a case warranting a six-figure retainer owing to its complexity, the volume of discovery, and the likelihood of a multi-month jury trial which would take place in Victorville, California, far from Downtown Los Angeles. In light of what I viewed as an injustice, I agreed to represent him for a reduced fee of $40,000.00. This fee agreement as per CA State Bar rules is memorialized in a written contract signed by Mr. Enamorado. He breached that contract by failing to pay even half the contracted amount while I continued to make appearances in Victorville and provide legal services to him. These services included a writ of habeas of corpus to the California Court of Appeal, a Petition for Review to the Supreme Court of California, a motion to dismiss on jurisdictional grounds, a bail reduction motion, propounding undisclosed exculpatory discovery, and more.<br><br>No court appearance was missed, and it is the practice of all California attorneys, and a condition of Mr. Enamorado’s retainer agreement that I would send agent attorneys on behalf of my office to address date-setting matters in court when otherwise engaged in litigation. This constituted an expense to my office that was paid on his behalf despite continued failure to honor his financial obligations.<br><br>My office prepared this case for trial but was ultimately unable to continue due to Mr. Enamorado’s failure to honor his contractual obligations despite multiple courtesies extended to him and a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship. As a result, I could not continue to act as his attorney. At no time prior to enforcing our contract did Mr. Enamorado or his cousin suggest any dissatisfaction. Only when it was clear my office would not continue to a months-long jury trial at our own expense, did Mr. Enamorado and his associates proceed to defame me unjustifiably.<br><br>The stream of dishonest reviews suggesting that an assortment of different amounts of money was “stolen” is slander and patently false. A review of my State Bar profile confirms that I have no complaints and any complaint lodged by this group will be investigated and dismissed in due course.<br><br>In the interim, I implore any member of the public utilizing Google reviews to investigate my office to view my reviews from genuine clients, and on other mediums where their algorithms do not allow for fake reviews associated with a particular account, like James the Barber’s “Exclusive Empire Barbershop”, to be published on a business profile.<br><br>Finally, my office and I thank all our clientele, many of whom have taken it upon themselves to write reviews to share their experiences, to assist me during this attack upon my reputation. You are all greatly appreciated, and I continue to be at your service.<br><br>DA