Complaint Review: John Temrowski begs judge for default decision

February 11th, 8:30 AM, here is attorney John Temrowski sitting in a courtroom getting ready to beg the judge, case 2012-004154-NZ, for a $150,000 against an individual that he claims to have made defamatory statements against him.   His reason for his claim is that his character and name was defamed because he was referred to as an idiot and someone dared to speak the truth about his activities and comments in a courtroom one day.   The real amusing thing about the whole thing is that I admitted to having made the comments, he even told the Attorney Grievance Commission that he believes I made the comments, yet he decided to sue a completely different individual.  

I might also note, that his most clever move was to try and get granted a default decision because he knew the defendant wasn't even living in the state of Michigan and most likely wouldn't show. According to Temrowski, he has lost his entire business because of one person, although now it's suppose to be a husband and wife, posting his name on an internet site.  Wow, sure didn't take much to ruin such an illustrious career.

If I didn't know this man, and sought to hire his services, I would be concerned about where he is spending his time as opposed to working on my case.  Apparently, Temrowski must have a lot of free time to waste these days.  I overheard him in the hallway discussing car pooling with his colleague/brother in the hallway.  I guess that's why he picked the date February 11, 2012.  His brother actually had a client so I guess he figured he would tag along.  I guess someone in the family still has a law practice.  

Notice Mr. John Temrowski, I don't use your colleague's name.  At least not the for the time being.  The problem is, the more you try and use your fraudulent tactics, insults, and threatening a person and their entire family, it's possible that at one point, they could do the same to you.  And you do have a big family; brothers, sons, etc.  

I hope things pick up for you, John.  I know that you still have a mortgage that you need to pay off and you're not getting any younger.  Unless, you have some plan to pay it off with beads.

I might also add, that it appears a judge has finally at least read into this type of suit.  I'm surprised that all of the people you spoke to about 'burying' your name in Google searches, not one of them informed you about the Communications Decency Act.  At least, I think this judge seems to have read into it a little.  Clearly, you don't know much about 'computers and the internet' as you have told judges.   If a case like yours were to prevail, I would hate to see the flood in the courts.  I can't wait to see a girl sue her boyfriend for calling her a s**t on Facebook.   Just wait until that day comes.

Either way, we can keep this battle going.  You keep your end going by your bias story-telling, or what I call lying,  in the courts and continuing to give them your money for motions and other filings.  I'll continue my end on this site and a new one that I am looking into.  I find this to be much more cost-efficient and convenient.

I was curious though, for the case that your partner had on 2-11-13, did you get a retainer from the plaintiff or are you taking something like a third of the settlement?  Never mind, I know the answer.  Of course, you got a retainer because we both know that the guy will never collect on the suit. What a coincidence that it was another DEFAULT case.   It might take a while but we both know that he'll actually end up losing on that deal when it's all said and done.  

Did you teach him to grunt and wince in pain as he sat down?  That was a cute touch but you should have told him that it wasn't necessary.  Hell, he already won.  I kind of sensed even the judge wasn't buying it but she had a job to do and since the defendant didn't even bother to show.  It was even more amusing that the client couldn't even remember his lines and had to have your partner basically read them for him while he just said, 'yes', 'yes', 'yes'.  But I guess that's what your firm gets paid for.

You should have at least included my wife's case with your DEAL that you proposed about me going  online and publishing things that state what a great guy and attorney you are.  Everyone I know and I mean everyone, told me that a deal with you wouldn't even be worth the paper it was written on.  Besides, what would I have to gain either way?  

I hope to see you in court with a client of your own soon, John.