Mr. Case
Los Angeles,#2REBUTTAL Owner of company
Fri, May 31, 2013
Kim Kearney of K3 Investments (business address 1107 Fair Oaks Avenue, South Pasadena, California 91030) was retained in early 2010 as a last-minute replacement for my real estate valuation expert who suddenly got sick on the eve of trial. With her help, my client won a jury verdict for $1.5 million, but the judge granted new trial on damages and the case was on appeal for two more years. We were not able to collect anything during this period.
For her services at deposition and trial, Ms. Kearney charged my client a total of $13,382.50. My clients are expected to pay all out-of-pocket costs charged by third party providers, including experts. It is my general policy not to advance litigation costs for clients. Unfortunately, my client did not have the money to pay Ms. Kearney's bill until money was collected.
Nevertheless, in 2010, Ms. Kearney was paid $3,750.00, which was 28% of her total bill for all services. I explained to Ms. Kearney that my client had no money, and that I also had cash flow problems from the recession and could not advance the remaining funds for my client. I am a sole practitioner and run a small business just like many of my clients.
I asked Ms. Kearney to be patient and wait until some money could be collected. Ms. Kearney became very upset, tried to report me to the bar, and posted complaints on this website and at least one other. It was difficult to talk with her while she was so upset. After awhile, we were able to resume civil communications, and I kept her informed as to the status of collection.
Ms. Kearney was paid the remaining balance in 2012 after the appeal was decided in our favor.
After this experience, I changed my expert retention policy to ask experts to negotiate and contract directly with the clients to avoid any confusion about terms and payment. This policy has been successfully implemented. For example, we retained six experts for a February 2012 trial in a property damage case, and all experts agreed to contract directly with the client instead of me. We settled the case successfully on the eve of trial, and the client paid all experts promptly and in full.
K
South Pasadena,#3Author of original report
Fri, May 13, 2011
Finally received a response from the attorney in this matter. There is no guarantee that this matter will be resolved, but at least it appears that the possibility may exist for payment for this seriously past due account, within the next few months. It is understood that many people are having problems in today's economy, so now more than ever, it is imperative that people due their own due diligence before being retained to ensure they do not experience similar financial hardship. On-going communication is imperative if there is any chance of resolving a situation in an amicable fashion and to the satisfaction of everyone involved.