Michael
Sussman lawyer reviews
Practice Area:
Civil Litigation
Profile updated: 12/11/07
Submit profile update
Rating: 2.1 (1-5)
based on 7 reviews.
Lawyer Michael Sussman
has a poor overall rating on LawyerRatingz.com.
The following postings have not been substantiated by LawyerRatingz.com.
Submit a news article about this lawyer
Rate this lawyer
| KEY |
Date |
|
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
|
|
|
|
Comments
|
|
|
2/24/21 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
Great. He understood the issues and represented our organization very professionally. He was successful in getting an injunction to stop developer destroying our entire neighboring forest while the action to stop the developers project was before the NY Supreme court and later successfully convinced Court to over rule the town and stopped the project. As a group we were very happy with his work and his reasonable fees..
|
|
|
|
1/12/15 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
consulted on a civil rights violation case against some major team players... Michael stated that he was representing me ... when I inquired about the progress on the case, he stated that he gave it to another attorney in office for review ... After she didn't get back to me, the total time lapse was a little over 6 months. Finally, (after I demanded) he informed me that he couldn't take the case because it is too big. He waisted most of the filing time allowed ... filed myself .... Very, very, UNPROFESSIONAL AND RIDICULOUS!! He implies that he is your representation... after several requests for paperwork and time lapse, he finally told me "the truth" .... LOL
|
|
|
|
3/8/13 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
After taking thousands in retainer funds, missed appointments and was not prepared. Claimed expertise in civil service law and gave incorrect information. Lost half of my case file and got nasty when confronted with his incompetence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SYSTEM: 2 negative duplicate or disallowed ratings automatically removed |
|
|
5/15/12 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
Very understanding and works in the best interest of his clients regardless of financial status.
|
|
|
|
11/1/10 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
9/12/08 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
IN OUR CIVIL SUIT AGAINST THE US POSTAL SERVICE WHICH CONTAINED DIRECT AND OTHER RELAVANT EVIDENCE OF HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT-DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION, THIS QUESTIONABLE ATTORNEY MAY HAVE SOLD US OUT. IN ADDITION, VERY IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS PROVIDED TO HIM DISSAPEARED AND HIS SECRETARIES DID MORE WORK THAN HIM ON THE CASE, WHICH WAS A JOKE. A CASE THAT WOULD HAVE BENEFITED ALL POSTAL EMPLOYEES AND IT WAS DISMISSED ON SUMMARY JUDGEMENT IS VERY QUESTIONABLE. WE WANTED TO APPEAL AND HE DID NOT. HE VIOLATED ETHICS BY NOT EVEN PROVIDING AN ATTORNEY THAT WE COULD CONTACT FOR THE APPEAL. AFTER PAYMENT WE WORKED WITH AN INCOMPETENT SECRETARY MORE THAN HIM. BEWARE!!
|
|
|
|
12/11/07 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
This rating was given because after receiving payment for his services he acted as though he was too busy to represent us. He was not prepared for court dates and did not show up at all on one occasion and didn't inform us. He never stood by his word in negotiations. He was not trustworthy and we would like to warn people looking for representation that he is incompitant.
|
|
Rate this lawyer
|
|
