Dinkes & Schwitzer, Malpractice Mavens: Clients Sue Them For Malpractice More Than Once

January 5, 2013 § 5 Comments

Dear Readers,

Another installment regarding  Dinkes & Schwitzer at 112 Madison Ave #10, New York
(212) 685-7800 who make litigation very expensive for the rest of us and have,  as due to their activities they’ve forced us to be litigious, i.e., sue them!

Let’s see, William Hamel , of Dinkes & Schwitzer indicted for Bribery  in Bronx Supreme Court -Criminal Term, and lo and behold, his firm, Dinkes & Schwitzer has been sued for Malpractice,  (Index # TS-300267-09/NY) as well!–Live and learn.-        (We have posted the link below. But it can also be accessed/googled via NY Unified Court System Local Civil Court in New York County and by using the Index # # TS-300267-09/NY).  

So the government accuses William Hamel of Dinkes & Schwitzer, of illegal activities and Dinkes & Schwitzer’s clients have a problem with them as well. Live and learn more. 

Our sources in the court tell us that this specific case was just settled, as of the end of 2011 which means that Dinkes & Schwitzer was compelled to pay the Plaintiff for damages.–The Malpractice attorneys, –and this goes for any attorneys, would not have taken the case unless they thought they could collect monetarily for damages.

With just a little journalistic investigation,  and we mean just a little, we found that  this is not the only case filed against Dinkes & Schwitzer by a former client. It can also be accessed via link: http: //iapps.courts.state.ny.us/webcivilLocal/LCSearch.

Obviously, it would seem Dinkes & Schwitzer didn’t want it to go to a jury. Maybe they were afraid of the bad publicity! –But not to worry, our Readership has does and will continue to accommodate them by posting the bad publicity on this and other blogs.–(The blogs exposing Dinkes & Schwitzer for what they are are mounting!).

We’ve got news for them their Malpractice cases are  on public record for the public  at large to access if and when they please. And it is our job as journalists to make sure that consumers know, hopefully before, and if we can’t catch them  beforehand, than at least during any of the unfortunate contact with Dinkes & Schwitzer that they may have.  This is not the Dinkes & Schwitzer  legal system. –We’d all have even more to fear than Dinkes & Schwitzer practicing and harming the public than that.

To be sure, it is stressful enough for someone to be a Plaintiff. People don’t relish filing yet another lawsuit, because their original lawyers acted underhandedly and/or were incompetent.

Beyond that, we won’t take up our time to wonder why this isn’t the only case where they had to defend themselves against Malpractice from former clients who felt Dinkes & Schwitzer worked strictly in Dinkes & Schwitzer’s own best interest thereby working against rather that working for their clients.

If Dinkes & Schwitzer desires, we’ll be very happy to publish the particulars of this specific case.–We’ll give them time to think about that.

So here it is: Dinkes & Schwitzer, The Malpractice Mavens: The law firm that must constantly defend themselves against one of many deserved Malpractice Suits:

WebCivil Local – Case Detail

 

Court: New York County Civil Court
Index Number: TS-300267-09/NY
Case Name: SHUGOL, YULIY vs. SCHWITZER, WILLIAM DINKES & SCHWITZER, DINKES & SCHWITZER, P.C. EFRON, JILL, AKA JILL ANN DINKES as Executor of the Estate of WILLIAM DINKES GELB & BLACK, P.C., GELB & BLACK GELB, JAMES BLACK, ANDREW
Case Type: Supreme Court Transfer
Classification:
Filing Date: 05/15/2009
Disposition Date: 11/13/2012
Calendar Number:
Jury Demand: Yes

 

Yes Ladies and Gentleman, the above was a Malpractice case that was filed against Dinkes & Schwitzer. –We know Dinkes & Schwitzer are really quite angry that we have posted it. But that’s really too bad as this is part of public record and Dinkes & Schwitzer shouldn’t have caused their own client to file a Malpractice case against them.

Bravo to this client for speaking up and for not letting Dinkes & Schwitzer get away with it. And we’ve a feeling, given what our audience and contributors have been and continue to tell us, Dinkes & Schwitzer’s Malpractice insurance premiums have long  been increasing.  Dinkes & Schwtizer need we repeat: hiring a PR company ot boost your rating s won’t help you.

By the by,  dear Readers, this is not the only Malpractice case that was filed against Dinkes & Schwitzer…..

But then this is not our only installment on the matter…………

Advertisements

§ 5 Responses to Dinkes & Schwitzer, Malpractice Mavens: Clients Sue Them For Malpractice More Than Once

  • bcoster says:

    Thanks for informative articles. This Hamel guy stole from us too. Thanks for giving us a forum for telling the world that these guys are shysters who should belong in jail.

    Like

  • ann says:

    Hello there, I discovered your website by way of Google while looking for
    a related matter, your site came up. I
    have bookmarked it in my google bookmarks. I was looking up Lawyers in Personal Injury in New York. I can see that Dinkes & Schwtizer is definitely not a firm I would or will hire as they couldn’t fulfill any legal needs. And I just tuned into your weblog and located it via Google. It’s really informative.

    I will be grateful for the information should I proceed with this in future.
    Numerous other people will benefit from your writing.

    Like

  • Hello there! This is my first visit to your blog!

    We are a group of volunteers and starting a new initiative
    in a community in the same niche. Your blog provided us
    beneficial information to work on. You have done a marvellous job!

    Like

  • Anonymous says:

    I really like what you have acquired here, certainly like what you are saying and the way in which you say it.

    Like

  • Can you tell us more about this? I’d like to find out some additional information.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

What’s this?

You are currently reading Dinkes & Schwitzer, Malpractice Mavens: Clients Sue Them For Malpractice More Than Once at world-news-media.com.

meta

%d bloggers like this: