Lawyers Not To Hire.com is UNDER CONSTRUCTION

Incident Summary: Marc Shuman, my lawyer, knowingly provided false information to the insurance adjuster about the status of my medical treatments following a car accident. He stated that I was discharged from treatments in February 2021, despite having medical records indicating that I completed my treatments in October 2021.

Additionally, Shuman failed to present medical records from spine surgeon Michael Conti Mica in his demand letter and did not obtain causation letters, further devaluing the claim. I had to pay for these documents using the help of an online paralegal, Lashay from Atomic Assistant, whom I highly recommend. Medicare did not cover cervical traction for home use, and the details and costs were not included in Shuman's demand letter.

Details:

• Date of False Statement: February 2021
• Accurate Medical Treatment Period: The treatment period was from the date of the car accident until October 2021.
• Medical Records Evidence:
  • Dr. Lee, Chiropractor at River One Health:
    • Specializes in treatments for whiplash car accident injuries.
    • Documented treatments from the car accident until October 2021.
  • False Statement by Marc Shuman: Claimed discharge from treatments in February 2021.

Impact: These false statements by Marc Shuman have negatively affected my insurance claim, reducing the compensation I was entitled to for my medical treatments and recovery period. His failure to include critical medical records and obtain causation letters further devalued my claim. 

Medicare's refusal to cover cervical traction for home use, and the omission of these details and costs in Shuman's demand letter, also impacted the claim. I had to pay for necessary documents using the help of an online paralegal, Lashay from Atomic Assistant, whom I highly recommend.

Conclusion: Marc Shuman's actions constitute a serious breach of trust and legal ethics, as they involved the deliberate misrepresentation of crucial medical information. This misconduct has had significant implications for my insurance claim and overall recovery process.

The Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission (IARDC) is the body responsible for overseeing lawyer conduct in the state of Illinois. It should ensure accountability and integrity among legal professionals. However, my experience has revealed a deep-rooted corruption and bias within the IARDC, particularly involving figures like James Needles and John Cesario, who have systematically failed to address legitimate allegations and instead perpetuated lies in their determination letters.

In my journey seeking justice, I have submitted multiple complaints detailing clear evidence of misconduct by lawyers like Marc Shuman and Michael A. Lew. Despite the overwhelming evidence, the IARDC has consistently dismissed my allegations without proper investigation. This negligence raises questions about the integrity and objectivity of the IARDC's processes.

Marc Shuman, a lawyer known for his unethical practices, has somehow evaded scrutiny by the IARDC. The IARDC's refusal to investigate Shuman suggests a deliberate attempt to shield him from accountability. This is particularly concerning given the numerous complaints filed against him, highlighting a pattern of neglect and misconduct.

Similarly, Michael A. Lew has managed to escape any form of disciplinary action despite being implicated in a fraudulent divorce case that resulted in severe personal and financial harm to me. The court acted retaliatorily, leading to my unjust imprisonment based on fraudulent claims. The IARDC's inaction in this matter not only encourages such behavior but also undermines public trust in the legal system.

The behavior of the IARDC, particularly individuals like James Needles and John Cesario, points to a disturbing trend. Rather than upholding justice, these officials appear to be facilitating fraud and bribery. Their determination letters are often filled with inaccuracies and lies, aimed at protecting unethical lawyers rather than holding them accountable.

My evidence includes court records, recorded phone calls, and other documents that clearly demonstrate the misconduct of the lawyers involved. Despite presenting this evidence to the IARDC, they have chosen to ignore it, further proving their bias and corruption.

According to the IARDC's own data, in 2017, they investigated 4,592 complaints, with a significant portion related to neglect and failure to communicate with clients. Despite this, the vast majority of complaints are dismissed because the IARDC allows lawyers to provide explanations that often go unchallenged. Only a small percentage of complaints lead to formal charges, and even fewer result in disciplinary action.

Most complaints are resolved at the intake stage, with around 80% being dismissed without further action. This shows a clear bias towards protecting lawyers rather than investigating claims thoroughly. If additional information is requested or the case is referred to a litigation lawyer, it is supposedly taken more seriously. However, my experience shows that even when clear and convincing evidence is presented, the IARDC fails to act appropriately.

The IARDC, through the actions of individuals like James Needles and John Cesario, has demonstrated a profound corruption and bias that undermines its role in regulating lawyer conduct. The organization appears more interested in protecting unethical lawyers than in ensuring justice for those wronged by legal malpractice. This corruption not only damages individual lives but also erodes public trust in the legal system. It is crucial for the IARDC to reform its processes and genuinely commit to holding lawyers accountable for their actions. Until then, the IARDC remains a symbol of the very fraud and bribery it is supposed to combat.

The IARDC provides relevant information about the overall complaint process and outcomes, though it is flawed in many aspects. Notably, Marc Shuman is not on the list of investigated lawyers.

• General Complaint Statistics: In 2017, the ARDC investigated 4,592 complaints, with approximately 40% stemming from allegations of neglect and 16% from failure to communicate with clients.

• Outcome of Complaints: The vast majority of grievances are dismissed because the lawyer can often explain the scenario and demonstrate that they did their best. Only a small percentage of complaints lead to formal charges and hearings, which must be proved with "clear and convincing evidence."

• Handling of Complaints: Most complaints are resolved at the intake stage, with about 80% of files being resolved without further action. If additional information is requested or the case is referred to a litigation lawyer, it is taken more seriously.

While these sources provide a broad overview of the complaint process and outcomes, they do not specifically address complaints about the determination letters themselves.

In the fast-paced world of legal services, finding a reliable and efficient paralegal can be a game-changer. When Marc Shuman's services fell short, I turned to Lashay Atomic Assist on Fiverr, and the experience was nothing short of exceptional. This article is a tribute to Lashay's dedication, expertise, and the invaluable assistance she provided during a critical time.

Navigating legal matters can be daunting, especially when the stakes are high. I found myself in a challenging situation where timely and accurate paralegal support was crucial. Unfortunately, my initial choice, Marc Shuman, did not meet my expectations, leaving me in a precarious position. It was then that I discovered Lashay Atomic Assist on Fiverr, and my legal journey took a positive turn.

From the moment I engaged with Lashay, her professionalism and commitment were evident. She quickly understood the complexities of my case and provided a clear roadmap for moving forward. Her paralegal services are comprehensive, covering everything from legal research and document preparation to case management and client communication.

1. Expertise and Knowledge: Lashay's deep understanding of legal procedures and terminology was instrumental in navigating my case. Her ability to interpret and apply legal principles ensured that all documents were accurate and compliant with relevant laws.
2. Attention to Detail: In legal matters, precision is paramount. Lashay's meticulous approach to document preparation and review left no room for errors, which could have otherwise led to significant setbacks.
3. Timeliness: Meeting deadlines is critical in the legal field. Lashay's prompt responses and efficient handling of tasks ensured that all submissions were made on time, keeping the case on track.
4. Communication: Clear and consistent communication is a hallmark of Lashay's service. She kept me informed at every stage, providing updates and seeking input when necessary. This transparency fostered a sense of trust and collaboration.
5. Affordability: High-quality legal services often come with a hefty price tag. However, Lashay's services on Fiverr are both affordable and of exceptional quality, making them accessible to a broader audience.

Lashay's assistance was a turning point in my legal journey. Her dedication and hard work not only filled the gap left by Marc Shuman but also exceeded my expectations. The peace of mind that came with knowing my case was in capable hands was invaluable. Lashay's paralegal services are a testament to the power of hard work, expertise, and a client-centric approach.

In a world where reliable legal support can be hard to find, Lashay Atomic Assist on Fiverr stands out as a beacon of excellence. Her hard work, attention to detail, and unwavering commitment to her clients make her an indispensable asset in any legal endeavor. If you find yourself in need of top-notch paralegal services, look no further than Lashay Atomic Assist. Her contributions will undoubtedly make a significant difference in your legal journey, just as they did in mine. To find Lashay Atomic Assist's paralegal services on Fiverr, you can use the following link to her profile: Lashay Atomic Assist on Fiverr 

In Will County, Illinois, the judicial system's integrity has been called into question, with Judge Roger Rickmon at the center of the controversy. Known for his contentious decisions, Judge Rickmon's actions in the courtroom have sparked debate and concern among many residents and legal professionals.

Judge Roger Rickmon began his legal career with a promising start, equipped with a solid educational background and early experience in various legal roles. However, his rise to the bench in Will County has been marred by allegations of corruption and questionable decisions, casting a shadow over his once-promising career.

One of the most controversial actions taken by Judge Rickmon was the issuance of a Dismissal for Want of Prosecution (DWP) in a high-profile case. Critics argue that this decision was not based on legal merits but rather on biased motivations, favoring certain parties over others. The DWP effectively ended the case, denying the plaintiffs their day in court and raising serious questions about the judge's impartiality.

Accusations of corruption have plagued Judge Rickmon's tenure. Many believe that his decisions are influenced by external pressures and personal interests rather than the fair application of the law. These allegations are supported by court transcripts and other evidence that suggest a pattern of favoritism and unethical behavior.

Court transcripts have emerged as a key piece of evidence in the case against Judge Rickmon. These documents reveal inconsistencies and questionable rulings that appear to deviate from standard legal procedures. Legal analysts who have reviewed the transcripts argue that they provide clear proof of judicial misconduct and corruption.

The actions of Judge Rickmon have had a profound impact on the community. Many residents and legal professionals have lost faith in the fairness of the judicial system, feeling that justice is no longer served in Will County. The dismissal of legitimate cases through DWPs has particularly undermined public trust, leading to calls for greater transparency and accountability.

In light of these serious allegations, there have been increasing calls for an investigation into Judge Rickmon's conduct. Advocacy groups and concerned citizens are demanding that the judicial system hold him accountable for his actions, ensuring that no judge is above the law. The push for accountability aims to restore faith in the legal process and ensure that justice is truly served in Will County.

The tenure of Judge Roger Rickmon in Will County, Illinois, has been marked by controversy and allegations of corruption. The issuance of DWPs and the evidence found in court transcripts have cast a significant shadow over his judicial career. As the community seeks answers and accountability, the case of Judge Rickmon serves as a stark reminder of the importance of integrity and transparency in the judiciary. Only through rigorous oversight and a commitment to fairness can the legal system hope to regain the trust of the people it is meant to serve.