I don't know, that's not nearly as over the top as I expected. Nice touch to point out the lawyer vs. non-lawyer aspect of their practice. Not so cool to name one of the associates as a former judge who decided many cases in claimants' favor - are they looking to bring an investigation down upon themselves? (whoops, I forgot, that's about to happen anyway, isn't it?)
The 1-800 social security rep commercials are disgraceful. When is the legislature going to realize that nation wide advertising for any legal service is a bad idea? And with the non-lawyer reps, its even more of an anything goes atmosphere. These guys are bound by no real advertising regulations at all..
10 Comments:
Can someone please bring me a bucket!
I don't know, that's not nearly as over the top as I expected. Nice touch to point out the lawyer vs. non-lawyer aspect of their practice. Not so cool to name one of the associates as a former judge who decided many cases in claimants' favor - are they looking to bring an investigation down upon themselves? (whoops, I forgot, that's about to happen anyway, isn't it?)
What planet is this Conn on? Krapton?
This was quite unprofessional for all of the reasons stated above.
I don't know whether to laugh or cry! All I can say WOW! How embarrassing.
By the way, what does he mean by "board certified specialist?" See link:
http://www.kybar.org/documents/scr/scr3/scr_3.130_(7.40).pdf
I don't think the Binders would agree with the Miss Congeniality title any more.
The 1-800 social security rep commercials are disgraceful. When is the legislature going to realize that nation wide advertising for any legal service is a bad idea? And with the non-lawyer reps, its even more of an anything goes atmosphere. These guys are bound by no real advertising regulations at all..
Hack, gag, barf...
1. Isn't Charles T. Hall also board-certified? Why all the grief over this?
2. Love it or hate it, he's making money hand over fist...
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home