Goldberg Weprin Finkel Goldstein Llp
Lawyers
Amanda B. Zifchak
Lawsuit & Dispute, International, Accident & Injury, General Practice,
Aubrey Elain Riccardi
Business, Real Estate, General Practice,
Bryce E. May
General Practice,
Daniel Joseph Slatz
General Practice,
Darryl Evan Strutton
General Practice,
Dena Copulsky Kaufman
Government, Lawsuit & Dispute,
Douglas Craig Taus
General Practice,
Erica Dawn Vitanza
Erik Zaratin
Real Estate, Lawsuit & Dispute, International, Estate, Estate
Evan Scott Zimmermann
Business, Lawsuit & Dispute, General Practice,
Harvey L. Goldstein
Humbert V. Maggiacomo
General Practice,
J Ted Donovan
Bankruptcy & Debt, General Practice,
Jay Edward Simens
General Practice,
John Patrick Hogan
Real Estate, General Practice,
Lisa C. Nasiak
General Practice,
Mark A. Lopez
Business, International, General Practice,
Matthew Ethan Hearle
General Practice,
Michael Benjamin Podolsky
General Practice,
Neal M. Rosenbloom
General Practice,
Neil Ian Albstein
General Practice,
Robert Jude Paparella
General Practice,
Stewart Adam Wolf
General Practice,
Reviews
They are good lawyers, but their billing is a fantasy. The bills are padded with outright fluff. They spend more time talking amongst themselves and billing you for it, than they do actual work. I would never use them again, look elsewhere.
I would give a zero star review, but it's not an option. I was involved in a landlord tenant dispute this past year and was referred to Goldberg Weprin, specifically Mr. Kevin Nash, the "pit bull" of L and T litigation. He promptly and avariciously (greedily) accepted our $10,000 retainer fee and assured us that we indeed had a legitimate and defensible case against our landlord. After minimal motion responses and submissions, and virtually NO personal contact with him Mr. Nash was challenged with a conflict of interest by the landlord plaintiff attorney as having performed "some" work for the landlord a full 10 years ago. I am told by my eventual representing attorneys that the statute on conflict is 7 years, maybe that's inaccurate?? Anyway, Mr. Nash decided that he wanted no part of arguing the conflict and submitted to the court a motion to recuse himself from the case, AT OUR EXPENSE OF COURSE. When asked for a refund of part of our retainer Mr. Nash returned a ridiculously trumped up bill that laughingly reported that we, in fact owed him $5000! This firm may carry a reputation, however, there is a threshold at which "you get what you pay for" morphs into "taking advantage of a client and ripping them off."
Make no mistake these guys are the best in the business
Great lawyer's