Complaint Review: George Golomb Attorney - Baltimore Maryland

Attorney’s response to the allegations:

Put up a lie or a mistaken fact on the Internet, and the Internet will spread it quickly. The problem is that the falsehood often draws much more attention than any correction put on the Internet. People may not even read the correction.

As for the allegations here, this Ripoff Report was not written by my client. It was written by someone my client sued.  The person who wrote the report was looking to damage my good name in the community. In short, the Ripoff Report was written by the opposing party and not by my client.

No one was "ripped off" by me in the case discussed. At no time did I simultaneously represent parties with a conflicting interest. I behaved ethically at all times.

This was an unusual situation: A mother and father allowed their child to live with a couple for a period of time. The couple then sued the father and mother to get custody of the child. The mother and father did not hire a lawyer at the time they were sued.

The couple was given custody of the child by the court when the father and mother of the child did not file Answers to the couple's lawsuit. The mother and father also did not respond to an order of default entered by the court.

After the couple was awarded custody of the child by the court, the mother came to see me for the first time. At the time she came to see me, her case was closed.  The mother hired me to file a motion in court seeking to modify the earlier child custody order. The mother argued in her court motion that she was never properly served with legal papers in the case.   

I represented the mother in her court argument that she was never properly served with legal papers.  The mother testified that she was not served with legal papers in a timely manner. The grandmother testified in support of the mother.   

 

The judge ruled that he did not believe the testimony of the mother or the grandmother. The judge refused to change his earlier ruling that the couple was awarded custody of the child. That case was closed by the court.

The child's mother and grandmother then decided that the child's grandmother should file for custody. With the express written permission of the mother, I filed a case in court for the grandmother requesting custody of the child for the grandmother. At a court scheduling conference early in the case, a court master (whose job is assist the judges in family law cases) made it plain that he thought that the closed case should be reopened. Since I had briefly represented the mother in the closed case and was then representing the grandmother in the new case, I could not represent both mother and grandmother if the closed case was reopened.  As a result, I did what the law required me to do to avoid any conflict of interest: I filed a motion to withdraw my appearance as the attorney for the grandmother. The court granted my motion to withdraw. I then sent a check for more than $1700 to the grandmother since these were funds she gave me which had not yet been earned by me. I also gave the grandmother the names and phone numbers of a number of excellent attorneys who I was confident would do excellent work for her. After the court granted my motion to withdraw, the old case was reopened and the two cases were consolidated. I never simultaneously represented parties whose interests conflicted.

The suggestion that I will take a client’s money and then leave them for no good reason is wrong.  I have represented numerous clients annually through to the conclusion of their cases since 1986. I try many cases for clients when reasonable settlements cannot be reached.  Sometimes I have been in court as many as four or five days a week arguing cases on behalf of my clients. When I stop representing a client before a case is closed, there has always a good reason for that.    

My good name is shown by many different things: I have the highest rating as to ethics and legal ability from the widely respected Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory (please see Martindale.com and Lawyers.com where my current rating from the lawyers surveyed is 5 stars out of possible 5 stars). Lawyers have selected me to serve on the Board of Governors of the Maryland State Bar Association and to teach professionalism to young lawyers as part of the Professionalism Committee of the Maryland State Bar Association. For years, I was selected by presidents of the Maryland State Bar Association to serve as the chairman of the Maryland State Bar Association Continuing Legal Education Committee. I was selected for years to serve on the Executive Council of the Bar Association of Baltimore City. I was elected by lawyers to be the Secretary of the Bar Association of Baltimore City.

My hard-earned good reputation is shown by other things as well: Clients and judges have repeatedly complimented me for the work I have done.  I have had my own law practice representing numerous clients annually since 1986. I have been a lawyer since 1974.

I regularly attend meetings of legal organizations whose purpose is to keep lawyers current on the latest developments in the law.

This Ripoff Report (which was written by a person who was not my client) is the first I have seen regarding me.  It is impossible to please everyone. I try my best to please my clients consistent with my professional duties as a lawyer.  

In short, I ripped off no one in the case. I never simultaneously represented persons with a conflict of interest.  My behavior was ethical and proper at all times.  I try to provide excellent service to clients. I am always honest with all of my clients. I hope that anyone thinking of hiring me will telephone me for a free telephone consultation at 443-653-0340.