Working with Hoffman & Forde -- specifically Mike Dicks -- was one of the most frustrating…read moreprofessional experiences I've ever had. My sister and I hired the firm to represent us in a construction defect case involving our home. At first, our case was assigned to a junior attorney. When that attorney left the firm, Mike Dicks took over. From that point on, the entire process became far more stressful and chaotic than it needed to be. Instead of feeling like our attorney was advocating for us, it constantly felt like we were being pressured, dismissed, or talked down to. Any time we asked questions or pushed back on changes, we were treated as if we were the problem. One of the most maddening patterns was being told that parts of the settlement agreement were "final." We were repeatedly told we could not make further changes. Then the defense would make additional changes anyway, and suddenly those changes were allowed. When we asked questions about those changes, we were told we were jeopardizing the deal. This happened over and over again and created constant confusion about what was actually finalized and what wasn't. Another major issue was the lack of attention to detail. We provided extensive documentation of the problems with our house, including photos and written descriptions. Despite that, several critical issues were not properly addressed in the settlement scope. My sister repeatedly had to review and redline documents herself just to correct errors or omissions that should have been caught by our attorney. A perfect example involves two large floor-to-ceiling windows. Multiple experts who walked through the house suspected those windows were leaking, but we did not yet have clear documentation of water intrusion. Then, right around the time we were being pushed to sign earlier versions of the settlement agreement, a storm came through. During that storm my sister was able to record water visibly running down the inside of one of the windows. Despite that evidence, those windows were still not included in the final settlement scope, even though they were clearly part of the water intrusion issues affecting the property. The office also seemed extremely disorganized. We were asked multiple times for documents we had already provided. Outdated versions of the settlement agreement were circulated and referred to as the final version. At times it genuinely felt like no one was carefully reviewing the documents being sent to us. We were also repeatedly told the defendants were essentially insolvent and that we needed to accept the settlement because there was no money to pursue. When we asked how that determination had been made, the only documentation referenced was a financial disclosure sheet completed by the defendant himself listing limited assets. We were never informed if the actual business's financial records had been reviewed. Throughout all of this, the firm's partner, Daniel Forde, was copied on many of the communications but never stepped in to address the obvious problems. To be clear, the construction work that is now being completed at the property has addressed many of the defects. In fact, the damage turned out to be so extensive that the contractors ultimately ended up doing far more work than what was originally contemplated in the settlement. But that outcome came despite the legal representation, not because of it. What should have been professional legal guidance instead turned into months of unnecessary stress, confusion, and frustration. Far too often it felt like we were the ones doing the detailed review work while also paying legal fees. If you are considering hiring Hoffman & Forde, I strongly recommend asking very direct questions about who will actually handle your case and how closely documents will be reviewed before anything is finalized. Our experience with Mike Dicks was chaotic, exhausting, and deeply disappointing.

We hired Hoffman & Forde to represent us in a construction defect case involving our home…read more Initially, we were assigned a junior attorney. After that attorney left the firm, the senior attorney on the case, Mike Dicks, took over. From that point forward, the experience deteriorated significantly. My sister and I genuinely dreaded seeing Mike's name appear in our inbox. Interactions with him were consistently stressful, confusing, and unproductive. Instead of feeling like our attorney was advocating for us, we often felt pressured, dismissed, or talked down to. One of the biggest problems was communication and consistency. Mike frequently declared things "final" instead of asking for our input. Later, the defense would make additional changes and those changes would suddenly be allowed. When we asked questions or pushed back, we were told we were jeopardizing the deal or creating problems. This happened repeatedly and made an already stressful legal process even more frustrating. Another major issue was the lack of attention to detail and organization. Despite providing extensive documentation and photos of the defects in our home, several important items were not properly addressed in the settlement scope. We repeatedly had to review and redline documents ourselves to correct errors or omissions that should have been caught by our attorney. At one point, outdated versions of the settlement agreement kept being circulated and referred to as the final version. Despite raising concerns, the version that ultimately ended up executed still reflected earlier drafts that had known issues. In addition, two large floor-to-ceiling windows that we had documented leaking with video evidence were not included in the settlement scope. Repairing those windows could cost tens of thousands of dollars out of pocket, despite being verbally agreed upon during mediation. Another troubling issue involved the claim that the defendants were essentially insolvent. When we asked how that conclusion was reached, we were told that the defense provided a financial disclosure sheet completed by the defendant himself listing a house owned by his wife. Despite the defendant owning a construction business, our attorneys did not obtain the financial records or tax returns of the business owned by the defendant. That left us with serious questions about how the insolvency conclusion was reached. The office also appeared extremely disorganized. We were asked multiple times for documents we had already provided, including basic tax information, and there were frequent email exchanges correcting mistakes or clarifying issues that should have been handled internally. What made the experience especially concerning was that the firm's partner, Daniel Forde, was copied on many of these communications but never stepped in to address the issues. To be clear, the construction work that is now being completed at our house has ultimately addressed many of the defects. In fact, because the damage to the house turned out to be more extensive than anticipated, the defendants ended up doing significantly more work than what was originally contemplated in the settlement. That is one of the few silver linings in an otherwise extremely frustrating process. However, the legal representation itself was disappointing. We expected an attorney who would carefully review documents, communicate clearly, and advocate for our interests. Instead, we often felt like we were the ones doing the detailed review work ourselves while also paying for legal services. If you are considering hiring Hoffman & Forde, I would strongly encourage you to ask detailed questions about who will actually handle your case and how closely documents and settlement terms will be reviewed before anything is finalized. Our experience with Mike Dicks was disorganized, stressful, and far below the level of professionalism we expected when hiring legal counsel.

Kevin is the real deal. Thoughtful, insightful, and well versed on those important next steps for…read moreyou / your situation. He is absolutely worth your time should you need guidance on a patent, trademark, etc.

I interviewed a couple of Patent Law Firms, including large firms that were highly recommended to…read moreme by Investors. I found Torrey Pines Law Group on my own and Kevin Buckley blew all of the other firms out of the water in responding to my inquiry within 24 hours, being personable, showing his passion for what he does, conveying the skills his firm, and giving me pricing I felt were fair. I am in Miami, FL and have had no issues with the distance between us. I feel just as important as if I was in California. The patent search pricing was exactly what Kevin had quoted me and it was very thoroughly done. I look forward to continuing our partnership.

I would highly recommend this firm, I personally was referred to Gupta Evans and I worked with his…read moreassociate Micheal both of them were incredibly professional, kind and went out of their way to help my husband and I. They made what we thought an impossible situation hassle free, I hope to never need them again but if I ever do they would be my first call. They did just move to a new office and it's beautiful inside! Definitely telling all my friends and family how amazing they were.

Mr. Gupta and his assistant were so helpful with our bankruptcy in…read more 2010. It is a very hard to lose your house due to foreclosure, but they walked us through the process, and it went very smoothly. 10 years later, we are re-building our lives, and will never have to go through that again. Our credit is on top as well. We will always remember Mr. Gupta's expert law team. T.Chahal

*AI SLOP* DO NOT HIRE…read more I hired Kayla and her firm to review a commercial lease and advise me on a minor billing dispute with my landlord (a $15 administrative fee on a third party bill). From the start, I made it clear that this wasn't about the amount, but about standing up for what was right under the terms of my lease. They said they could help. What I received in return for roughly six hours of billed time (around $2,400) was a memorandum that read exactly like what people call "AI slop" generic, repetitive, and almost entirely restating what I had already written in my own intake summary email. There was no meaningful legal analysis or application of the lease provisions, and several of my questions were completely ignored or misunderstood. It was exactly as if I just copied and pasted the email I sent to them and generated a "lease review". I went and tried it myself and got almost EXACTLY the same "lease review". It really missed the human element. An entire paragraph was dedicated to how if it wasn't a third party bill then they are correct in charging me this. This paragraph was the most obvious giveaway as I made it clear by uploading the bill and stating it on the phone this is a third party bill. This didn't make it to the AI slop "lease review" they generated because in my email text it wasn't specified, and typical of AI responses, they touch all the bases. When I followed up to clarify, the responses continued to miss the point. It felt like a mix of human element with AI assistance even with my communications with Kayla, so it caused a few email back and forths. I raised concern that the memo appeared to have been prepared using AI or some automated drafting tool, since it lacked the depth and reasoning expected of an attorney. That question was never addressed. To make matters worse, after taking on my case fully aware of the limited monetary value of the dispute, I was told only after the bill was run up that the issue was too small for the firm to pursue -- and that I should handle it myself in small claims court. This experience felt unprofessional, ethically questionable, and entirely inconsistent with the transparency expected under the California Rules of Professional Conduct. I do not recommend this firm for anyone expecting a genuine attorney review or personalized legal work. Furthermore I stand by my claim that what I received was AI slop, and am happy to share with anyone what I received so they can see it for themselves. Email me at boba29428@gmail.com if you're interested. As far as I'm concerned I paid $2400 for AI slop and a few back and forth emails to clarify AI slop.

I know the reason why people hate attorneys. And the way this firm works is one reason behind it. I…read morespend $10,000 to resolve Absolutely nothing they led me in the wrong direction. They had all of the information and for two months we're trying to go after an individual that I believe was wrong and it took him two months to tell me oh we can't go after him. It has to be this other person total waste of time total waste of money and on top of that I get my last invoice and which they charge me just to talk to me about canceling my counsel. In order to save you guys money don't go here. Total fraud waste of freaking time..

Thank you for helping walk us through the basics of what we need to set up trusts for the kiddos…read moreand holding our hand each step of the way. Elizabeth, thank your for all you do and we will look forward to working with you in the future. Like others in North County, we work very hard and want to make sure we "keep what we earn" - thank you for making this as painless as possible. I'm reminded about the old adage, "nobody wants a lawyer until they NEED one" .. so glad we found you close to home at the right time. Please thank your staff and Brian and we'll see you soon. Truly, Jim

Tresp Law File No. 23-01791…read more After approximately three years of representation, the mineral deed issue became the final straw in Plaintiff's dissatisfaction with Tresp Law. Under the settlement, Defendants were responsible for causing one-half of a specified royalty interest to be transferred to Plaintiff. Tresp Law stepped in and represented that it could handle the deed preparation more quickly and less expensively than if Defendants continued handling it themselves. Tresp Law then spent months researching, preparing, and recording the deed, and Plaintiff paid the firm for that work. The deed was recorded on February 24, 2026. Plaintiff terminated the attorney-client relationship on March 4, 2026. Tresp Law itself acknowledges that the deed work was performed while it represented Plaintiff and that the purpose of that work was to carry out the transfer required by the settlement. After the representation ended, the operator responsible for administering the royalty interest advised that problems existed with the deed and that corrective documentation was required before the interest could be properly divided. Plaintiff requested a refund of the deed-preparation fees. Tresp Law refused. In its August 26, 2026 response, the firm stated that the deed had "conveyed to you an undivided one-half interest, as the Settlement Agreement contemplated," despite the operator's determination that corrective documentation was required. Tresp Law's position appears to be that because it researched, prepared, and recorded a deed, the work was "performed and completed." Plaintiff's position is very different: the firm was paid to prepare a legal instrument that accomplished a specific transfer, not merely to produce and record a document. For Plaintiff, Tresp Law's refusal to refund the fees or otherwise accept responsibility for a deed that required corrective work represents a refusal to stand behind the result of its own legal work. This review addresses only the mineral deed issue. There is considerably more to Plaintiff's three-year experience with Tresp Law. Additional video reviews addressing specific communications, billing issues, litigation decisions, and supporting documents will be published on various social media platforms so viewers can review the record and reach their own conclusions. One of Plaintiff's broader frustrations with Tresp Law was the distinction between work being performed and the case actually moving forward. Plaintiff often felt that tasks were completed, time was billed, and invoices were generated without a corresponding sense that the litigation had materially advanced. In Plaintiff's opinion, a client should not confuse activity with progress. And perhaps that is the larger point. If Tresp Law devoted as much energy to efficient, careful, results-oriented work for its clients as Plaintiff believes it devotes to disputing or attempting to remove unfavorable public reviews, Plaintiff's experience with the firm might have been very different. In Plaintiff's opinion, a law firm's reputation is better protected by the quality of its work than by trying to control criticism of that work. Plaintiff is prepared to post the relevant emails, invoices, recorded deed, operator correspondence, and other supporting documentation so readers can review the underlying record for themselves and reach their own conclusions.

I was luckily put in touch with Adam Davalos through a reference for city permit issues, and he was…read moreso helpful in understanding our situation and giving us excellent advice. I was using a different lawyer earlier which charged more and did less, so I was so happy to find Booth and Davalos. You will not go wrong giving this team a try.

Our deepest appreciation to the law firm of Booth & Davalos, and in particular to Adam Davalos…read more I reached out to several firms with extremely difficult business litigation case and either had response they unable to help us or very unreasonable fees were asked. Adam was the first one to call me back and set up a meeting. Adam did not charge us consultation, which lasted over 3hrs, fee and advised what our options might be. He spent several days including weekend to review the case since we had very tight deadlines including upcoming hearing. He helped us in a very desperate situation and charged fair fees. His expertise, attention to detail and focus on the entire case helped us to avoid monetary sanctions. Will definitely reach out if need any legal advise or legal representation again. Highly recommended!

Called and he wanted to know my tv show concept and refused to help me draft a contract when I…read moredidn't tell him the concept to protect intellectual property. Do not trust!

Wow. David was recommended to me by a friend in business as I was starting up my own. He exceeded…read moreall of my expectations and I will certainly be recommending him to anyone who asks me. Aside from his responsiveness and professionalism, I truly appreciated how straightforward David was about cost. David was fantastic at explaining processes. He was also honest about what absolutely needed to be done and what was a judgement call or preference. I will be maintaining David to handle annual compliance matters. Thank you David!

I had a real-estate issue I was researching. Jack Lieb addressed my questions and concerns…read morepromptly, professionally and to my full satisfaction. I enthusiastically recommend this firm.

I have used Lieb & Lieb attorney service many times and won every case. Jack & Richard are the best…read moreand very professional and polite. Both know the letter of the law and know how the legal