David
Twin Lakes,#2Author of original report
Wed, April 12, 2006
Please disregard all statements that I made in the above report about Dolci, McMahon and Scarpino. I have abosolutely no complaints about the legal services of Dolci, McMahon and Scarpino. In fact, they are excellent attorneys and know best how to represent their clients.
Dave
New Westminster,#3Consumer Suggestion
Tue, April 04, 2006
Yes, you paid a lot of money for very little work. I'll agree with that.
David
Twin Lakes,#4REBUTTAL Individual responds
Tue, April 04, 2006
For all your people responding to my complaint against DMS, you ought to get you arguments straight. Argument ad hominum means "at the other". In other words, you are wrong because you are fat. This approach doesn't cut in philosophy or the real world. The [point I am trying to make is that I was ripped off becausue I was told a coase was didmissed. If Dolci was nay kind of an attorney, he would have told me that the dismissed case could be brought up again. Ripp Off. Also I was charged $5000 for 13 continuances. These 13 appearances were made by DMS while they were representing 20 other people on the same day. Ripp Off. As for my driving record. It's none of your business but I will say that I have no DUIs and I am legally driving....
Barry
Alsip,#5Consumer Comment
Mon, April 03, 2006
I understand you feel like you got cheated out of $5000 by your lawyers. However, have you ever thought that this might never had happened if you had just given your keys up instead of getting behind the wheel. Be lucky all you got was a suspended license and not 10 years in jail for vehicular manslaughter.
Dave
New Westminster,#6Consumer Suggestion
Mon, April 03, 2006
When charges are dismissed by a judge, the charges are not forgotten. There's nothing in a dismissal that prevents the State from refiling another indictment. Double Jeopardy doesn't apply to dismissals. One element of your report that I'd like to ask about is why your license was revoked in the first place? It appears to me that even though the first charge was dismissed, two subsequent charges led to the first charge to be refiled. I'm a bit surprised that there isn't more venom in the responses. Drunk driving was illegal long before MADD got involved.
David
Twin Lakes,#7Author of original report
Mon, April 03, 2006
2 people obviosly cannot read. I will make my 1st point of how I was ripped off very simple. Dominic Dolci went to court for me to defend me for DWLR. He came out of court and said he got the case dismissed. He did not provide me with a certified copy of the court's disposition. (Ripp off) The court did not dismiss the case as he said because I was lated indicted for the same charge (Ripp off again) Plus if he was a real man he would have told me he didn't dismiss the case rather than say that he did and set me up for a suprise indictment. This is the beginning of the Ripp Off. Are those who could not understand the ripp off beginning to see the rip off?
David
Twin Lakes,#8Author of original report
Mon, April 03, 2006
2 people obviosly cannot read. I will make my 1st point of how I was ripped off very simple. Dominic Dolci went to court for me to defend me for DWLR. He came out of court and said he got the case dismissed. He did not provide me with a certified copy of the court's disposition. (Ripp off) The court did not dismiss the case as he said because I was lated indicted for the same charge (Ripp off again) Plus if he was a real man he would have told me he didn't dismiss the case rather than say that he did and set me up for a suprise indictment. This is the beginning of the Ripp Off. Are those who could not understand the ripp off beginning to see the rip off?
David
Twin Lakes,#9Author of original report
Mon, April 03, 2006
2 people obviosly cannot read. I will make my 1st point of how I was ripped off very simple. Dominic Dolci went to court for me to defend me for DWLR. He came out of court and said he got the case dismissed. He did not provide me with a certified copy of the court's disposition. (Ripp off) The court did not dismiss the case as he said because I was lated indicted for the same charge (Ripp off again) Plus if he was a real man he would have told me he didn't dismiss the case rather than say that he did and set me up for a suprise indictment. This is the beginning of the Ripp Off. Are those who could not understand the ripp off beginning to see the rip off?
David
Twin Lakes,#10Author of original report
Mon, April 03, 2006
2 people obviosly cannot read. I will make my 1st point of how I was ripped off very simple. Dominic Dolci went to court for me to defend me for DWLR. He came out of court and said he got the case dismissed. He did not provide me with a certified copy of the court's disposition. (Ripp off) The court did not dismiss the case as he said because I was lated indicted for the same charge (Ripp off again) Plus if he was a real man he would have told me he didn't dismiss the case rather than say that he did and set me up for a suprise indictment. This is the beginning of the Ripp Off. Are those who could not understand the ripp off beginning to see the rip off?
Timothy
Valparaiso,#11Consumer Comment
Fri, March 31, 2006
Carl is absolutely right. No lawyer will guarantee results. It just won't happen. You hired this firm to REPRESENT you, not to "get your charges dismissed." If you thought you were hiring a lawyer to get charges dismissed, then I can see why you feel ripped off, but that's your own misunderstanding, not the lawyer's issue. He may have told you that dismissla was a possibility, but NOT a certainty. That's not to say that you weren't otherwise done wrong, but in "reading between the lines," I don't think you were.
Carl
El Cajon,#12Consumer Comment
Mon, March 27, 2006
Even with the update, the report is still not a model of clarity. Attonreys cannot guarantee any results, including the ability to get you off on all charges or to completely clean up your record. Glaringly missing from your report is any credible claim that you were innocent of the charges.
David
Twin Lakes,#13Author of original report
Mon, March 20, 2006
1. I hired Dolci, McMahon & Scarpino (DMS)to completely handle (get dismissed) (1) DWLR charge. Dolci went to court an came out saying the case was dismissed. (He did not give me a copy of the courts disposition.) One year later I was indicted for the same charege which was enhanced to a felony DWLR.) So, how was I ripped off? I was told the original misdemeanor DWLR was dismissed, but really it wasn't. Because if it was, I wouldn't have been indicted for he charge one yeatr later. 2. I also obtained (2) other DWLR (and one DUI which I refused to take the breathalyzer which is call Statutory Summary Suspension SSS), so now I had a total of three DWLR. I told DMS to get the charges dismissed. During a (1) year time span, the only thing DMS did was get continuances. They missed the 90 day time period during which I am allowed by law to petetion to dismiss the SSS. The only thing they were able to do is plea bargain with the State to get 61 days in jail for each. (This was before the two other DWLR were enhanced to felonies.) If I would have accepted the offer, the State would have nailed me to the cross with 180 days in jail (mandatory minimum sentence for this charge) on each DWLR for a total of 1 1/2 years in jail. So, in summary DMS ripped me off because they charged me $5000.00 for (13) continuances, failed to petition the SSS and failed to get the charges dismissed.
Timothy
Valparaiso,#14Consumer Comment
Fri, March 17, 2006
David, I'm having trouble identifying what exactly happened with your case. I'm not disputing the fact that you were ripped off but, if you were, I'm having a hard time seeing how (for the msot part). As I read your report, you seem to be saying that you hired this firm to deal with three charges of driving while your license was revoked. You were told that these charges were dismised, but were later indicted for felony DWLR. Correct? By the plain language of your report you hired this firm to deal with your charges, and nothing in your report states that they didn't do so. in fact, the only logical interpretation of your report is that they DID take care of the charges, but you continued to drive on a revoked license and got busted. If I understand this correctly, you didn't hire the firm to get your license reinstated, you hired them to deal with the charges levied against you for driving on a revoked license. While I undserstand your analogy to a physician removing only part of a cancer, you're comparing apples and oranges in this instance. Attorneys are hired to perform specific tasks, not to generally alleviate all of your problems. If your engagement letter only provided for services related to the charges of DWLR, then I don't see how you were ripped off. On the other hand, if you hired the attorney to deal with the charges AND reinstate your license, then you were ripped off. But if you hire a plumber to snake out your clogged drain, don't expect him to replace the sagging pipe! I do have to say that 5 grand is a bit steep for a handful of DWLRs that apparently were resolved by simple hearings. And again, if I've misunderstood your report, then I apologize.