Defending People

the tao of criminal-defense trial lawyering

Andy Nolen, “Lawyer” [Updated Again]

Okay, let’s play “one of these things is not like the other things,” Hous­ton criminal-defense lawyer edition.

Ready?

Which of these things just doesn’t belong?

If you guessed “Andy Nolen”, you’re right.

Because John Floyd, Jack Car­roll, Don Becker, Tyler Flood, and Wayne Hill are extremely com­pe­tent, tal­ented lawyers who have tried crim­i­nal cases? It’s a good answer, but not the one I’m look­ing for.

Because John Floyd, Jack Car­roll, Don Becker, Tyler Flood, and Wayne Hill are the kind of criminal-defense lawyers you want on your side when you’re forced into bet-your-freedom lit­i­ga­tion? Also a good answer, but again, that’s not it.

Because John Floyd, Jack Car­roll, Don Becker, Tyler Flood, and Wayne Hill are hon­est men who can get hired with­out play­ing bla­tantly decep­tive adver­tis­ing games? Closer, but still not it.

Because Andy Nolen is the only one who has won a Defend­ing Peo­ple Ass­hat Lawyer of the Day Award? Get­ting warmer.…

Okay, okay: it’s not really a fair game. What I was look­ing for is this: Andy Nolen is the only per­son who got five stars from this guy when he left 13 lawyer reviews on July 19th.

Here’s the guy’s review of John Floyd, whom he gave one star:

Not sure what to say?
Take a look at our Review Guide­lines first.
Keep these tips in mind:
Write like you’re telling a friend about your expe­ri­ence. Give specifics and help­ful details.
Write fairly about the busi­ness or ser­vice. Don’t include per­sonal infor­ma­tion about the owner or estab­lish­ment.
Do not use pro­fan­ity, and do not include your own

Oh, and since he seems to have screwed that one up, he also left this review for John:

Thank God this man isnt defend­ing peo­ple on death row, the price of rope would have dou­bled by now

Here’s his review of Tyler Flood (also one star):

Write fairly about the busi­ness or ser­vice. Don’t include per­sonal infor­ma­tion about the owner or estab­lish­ment.
Do not use pro­fan­ity, and do not include your own email, phone num­ber, or other per­sonal details

Here’s his review of Wayne Hill (one star):

I’m not sure I would really rec­om­mend this firm. Defi­nately not the cheap­est. My wife sug­gested that I don’t bother to com­ment, but I feel that’s my right after I paid.

Here’s his review of Jack Car­roll (one star):

I just don’t feel that my offense got taken seri­ously enough by these guys. My future is no laugh­ing mat­ter espes­cially now adays with the econ­omy tight and these guys being OVERPRICED like that. I worked too hard to keep a roof and car to just loose it all. Get some­body better.

Here’s his review of Jack’s part­ner Don Becker (one star):

Wanted way too much money, hired some­one else. Waited for return calls which i never got, seemed dis­in­ter­ested in me.

And here’s our anony­mous friend’s review of Andy Nolen:

…the painful truth is that there are lit­er­ally hun­dreds of choices for crim­i­nal defense in the Hous­ton and Har­ris County area, I can sim­ply tell you that when our fam­ily was in dire need of fast and afford­able legal ser­vice, Mr. Nolan responded imme­di­ately and got the results we needed. I would rec­om­mend him to any­one in trou­ble period.

Any­one who knows any of these lawyers knows that there is no pos­si­ble way that these reviews are true. Peo­ple who have hired Wayne Hill do not then go and hire Andy Nolen (though they might well go in the oppo­site direction).

Who is respon­si­ble for this non­sense? The legal prin­ci­ple of viaticum sequere gives us the most likely answer. That Andy Nolen needs fraud­u­lent reviews (of him­self as well as of actual criminal-defense lawyers) as well as the rest of his reper­toire of sleazy, decep­tive, manip­u­la­tive adver­tis­ing speaks vol­umes not only about his char­ac­ter, but also about his ability.

Or, more pre­cisely, his lack thereof.

[Update: For more on Andy Nolen, see:
Hous­ton criminal-defense lawyer Paul Kennedy: I’m call­ing you out, Andy Nolen.
Hous­ton criminal-defense lawyer Cyn­thia Hen­ley: Think­ing about hir­ing Andy Nolen — let’s put it this way — you bet­ter shop around …
Miami criminal-defense lawyer Brian Tan­nebaum: In Hous­ton, Crim­i­nal Defense Lawyer Andy Nolen is the Best. Every­one Else Sucks.
Hous­ton criminal-defense lawyer Mur­ray New­man: When We All Agree
Hous­ton criminal-defense lawyer John Floyd: Hous­ton Attor­ney Andy Nolen: A Dis­hon­est Lawyer?
Hous­ton DWI Lawyer Dane John­son: New Lows in Lawyer Mar­ket­ing — Andy Nolen’s style
The Fur­ther Adven­tures of “Lawyer” Andy Nolen
The Con­tin­u­ing Adven­tures of “Lawyer” Andy Nolen
Andy Nolen: Total Fraud?
Andy Nolen: Today’s Last Chap­ter]

Share

Tags: , , , , ,


This entry was posted by on Monday, August 17th, 2009 at 8:56 am and is filed under advertising, Andy Nolen, criminal defense lawyers. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

About The Author

Mark Bennett got his letter of marque from the Supreme Court of Texas in May 1995. He is famous for having no sense of humor when it comes to totalitarianism.

Comments

8 Responses to “Andy Nolen, “Lawyer” [Updated Again]”

  1. Patrick says:
    17 August 2009 at 4:18 pm

    Among the last things I give would give a damn about when hir­ing a crim­i­nal defense attor­ney would be his knowl­edge of Latin legal maxims.

    Yours is the ONLY PAGE IN EXISTENCE that includes the legal prin­ci­ple of “sequere viaticum”. I still can’t fig­ure out what you mean, even though I know a bit of Latin.

    I can see it now. Ben­nett & Ben­nett . Their mis­use of Latin, or per­haps it was use of Latin so obscure it doesn’t appear in Black­stone, Pliny the Elder, Thomas Aquinas, or Caesar’s Com­men­taries on the Gal­lic War, con­fused me, so I hired Andy Nolen, who explained the term “mens rea” to the jury in a man­ner I’m sure most of them would understand.

    Of course, if I hit the fan in Hous­ton, I’d hire you. See sen­tence one. Awful Latin. Great post.

    Reply
    • Mark Bennett says:
      17 August 2009 at 5:03 pm

      One of the things lost in the tragic events of this morn­ing was the cor­rec­tion I had made to my legal principle.

      Should be “viaticum sequere.” Fol­low the money.

      Reply
      • Stephen Rice says:
        11 September 2009 at 4:51 am

        That’s a very handy phrase. I under­stood viaticum to be Church latin (I had a thor­ough edu­ca­tion if noth­ing else) and was really con­fused by why you were ask­ing us to fol­low the Holy Com­mu­nion. Why didn’t they set­tle on a word like pecu­nia or some­thing eas­ily deriv­able like that?

        Reply
        • Mark Bennett says:
          11 September 2009 at 6:15 am

          I actu­ally made that up. Would pecu­nia sequere make more sense?

          Reply
          • Stephen Rice says:
            11 September 2009 at 7:42 am

            Well, I’ve not done any Latin since high school so I’ve for­got­ten most of the gram­mar I ever knew. Pecu­nia is just the basic noun for coins in your pocket sort of money. I can remem­ber that sequor is “to fol­low” and sequere is the imper­a­tive from that so it’s just a mat­ter of mak­ing the noun agree with the verb.

            Alter­na­tively I quite like “cui bono” — to whose benefit.

            Reply
  2. Ken Is On Vacation, And I’m Going Through A Black Spell… | Popehat says:
    17 August 2009 at 4:39 pm

    […] of a decent blog­ger is to link to other blog­gers when he has noth­ing to say: So on that note, do not anger Mark […]

    Reply
  3. Defending People » Lethal Generosity Revisited says:
    20 August 2009 at 7:44 am

    […] Andy Nolen, “Lawyer” [Updated Again] […]

    Reply
  4. Will marketers ruin online reviews? « Steve Rides a Bike says:
    18 September 2009 at 8:29 am

    […] Hous­ton, Mark Ben­nett has writ­ten exten­sively recently about his run-ins with two dif­fer­ent lawyers using questionable […]

    Reply

Leave a non-anonymous Reply

«     »