Cancel

    Open app

    Search

    Deconcini McDonald Yetwin & Lacy, PC

    3.3 (3 reviews)

    Services - Deconcini McDonald Yetwin & Lacy, PC

    Business litigation

    Estate planning

    Real estate law

    Deconcini McDonald Yetwin & Lacy, PC Photos

    You might also consider

    More like Deconcini McDonald Yetwin & Lacy, PC

    Recommended Reviews - Deconcini McDonald Yetwin & Lacy, PC

    Your trust is our priority, so businesses can't pay to alter or remove their reviews. Learn more about reviews.
    Yelp app icon
    Browse more easily on the app
    Review Feed Illustration

    6 months ago

    Helpful 0
    Thanks 0
    Love this 0
    Oh no 0

    11 years ago

    Helpful 4
    Thanks 0
    Love this 0
    Oh no 0

    11 years ago

    Helpful 0
    Thanks 0
    Love this 0
    Oh no 0

    You might also consider

    Verify this business for free

    Get access to customer & competitor insights.

    Verify this business

    Brei Law Firm

    Brei Law Firm

    (12 reviews)

    I held the mortgage when I sold our old house. When I had a problem with getting the monthly…read morepayments on the house, I went looking for a law firm specializing in real estate. Based on reviews, I pcked Brei-Castillo. Justin Castillo has been wonderful. I nearly broke down crying when I went to his office. But he reassured me and started work immediately. The problem has been resolved and I can stop worrying. Justin is a great lawyer, knowledgeable and caring. I recommend him and his firm to anyone who needs a real estate lawyer.

    I hired Mr. Castillo in June to represent me. He successfully completed sending a demand letter and…read morecreating a draft complaint at the cost of $3500. In Sept, I was expecting an updated draft complaint with edits I had sent to him. Instead of contacting me regarding my updates to the complaint; Mr. Castillo instead contacted the city I live in for documents I had already supplied his office in June. He then, using the same documents, claimed my case was weak and said he wanted to change my complaint. However, the email and letter he sent gave no indication about how he wanted to change my complaint, nor did he provide me the updated draft copy I had been waiting 10 days for. He did provide a photograph of one side (there are two) of an inspection record which he called a 'document' in later correspondence with me. Another document that he alluded to in his Sept email I didn't receive until 4 Dec; It took leaving 2 reviews and 3 more emails to his office. His reasoning for not providing the document sooner was I told him to "standby." However, he alluded to this document on 10 Sept and I told him to standby on 24 Sept. Now I'm told that document was "inadvertently not included" in his 10 Sept email to me. When I received September's Invoice, I was charged again for "reviewing" documents- including the ones he had already received from me. I first asked him about the billing and the fact that he had not provided me any additional documents than what I already had received from the city. When Mr. Castillo responded to my initial questions he did not provide the documents, nor did he elaborate on how he wanted to change my complaint. I tried again to point out to Mr. Castillo that, a photograph is not a document and the secondly I did not receive the missing document, I believe it is My directness in conversing with Mr Castillo that caused him to decide "this relationship isn't working out" and quit, in an email, on Wednesday before Thanksgiving at 330 PM. In that email he offered to "refund" me $700 for the work he did relating to the city's documents. I believe this was offered because I have a valid Arizona Bar complaint for over-billing and abandoning a client. However, in order to receive my retainer and refund I will need to make the 4-hour round trip drive to his office since he won't mail it- but his office encouraged me to mail-in rather than drive up my last deposit? Overall, the majority of my costs were incurred though correspondence with Mr. Castillo with little actual work on my case. I am dissatisfied with the lack of communication from Mr. Castillo regarding his desire to change my complaint without any clarity about how he wanted to change it until the email where he quit. I was also informed by Mr Castillo he will sue me if I do not remove my review; claiming it's defamatory. In order to protect myself and freely express my unhappiness regarding Mr. Castillo's professional performance I edited this review. I received a second correspondence from Mr. Castillo regarding my previous yelp and google reviews. Considering I have nothing positive to say about Mr. Castillos handling of my case, I am not surprised he is unhappy with my review. Now, I believe he is trying to intimidate me by threatening a lawsuit. However, my perception of my professional interactions with Mr. Castillo is not defamation. He failed to perform his duties to my expectations. I've said nothing of his personal character, only my personal disappointment with the service he provided. Since Mr. Castillo is sending private correspondence directly to me regarding these reviews, instead of addressing them publicly leads me to believe that he has used the same threats and intimidation in the past to have negative reviews removed. I received an email from an attorney's office claiming to represent Mr. Castillo with a demand letter stating that he is going to file lawsuit on 16 December if I do not remove my review- free speech is not illegal and Ive stated nothing false. Also, it's been three weeks since he QUIT ON ME- and the $10,000 I deposited for retainer has not been refunded to me.

    King & Frisch

    King & Frisch

    (3 reviews)

    Zero Stars -- Due Diligence Was Absent…read more King & Frisch PC threatened eviction without performing even the most basic due diligence. The firm failed to review readily available deeds, title records, tax documents, or mortgage information before asserting claims about ownership and eviction rights. Their client misrepresented who owns the home, and the firm repeated those claims without verification. An individual with no ownership interest, no title, and no legal authority cannot evict an owner of a property, yet eviction was threatened anyway. Additionally, the firm attempted to evict a lawful tenant with a valid, enforceable lease, which has been reviewed and confirmed by independent legal counsel. This should have been immediately apparent had even minimal investigation been conducted before escalating the matter. Compounding this, their client has been harassing us for months, repeatedly asserting rights he simply does not have. Despite clear documentation disproving his claims, those assertions were advanced without verification, further fueling the harassment. This lack of investigation and reliance on false premises caused significant and unnecessary emotional distress, fear, and disruption to my life. The situation became so overwhelming that I was forced to leave Arizona temporarily and travel to Dallas simply to escape the ongoing harassment and stress. This entire ordeal was avoidable. A cursory review of the facts would have prevented the escalation, threats, and harm caused. Based on my experience, this firm's approach was careless, unprofessional, and fell well below the standard expected of legal counsel. I would also hope that this firm conducts appropriate diligence regarding the litigation history and credibility of its client before advancing serious legal threats. A review of publicly available court records reflects a pattern of initiating unsupported or extraordinary legal actions, including lawsuits against federal agencies such as the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and the United States Postal Service, as well as legal action against his own attorney, accompanied by demands that counsel be jailed. These matters were pursued without legal basis and dismissed. Such a history should reasonably prompt heightened scrutiny before repeating or amplifying a client's allegations. Given the circumstances, a written apology acknowledging the lack of due diligence and the harm caused would be appropriate. As a State bar review.

    After inquiring about hiring an attorney to represent me in a landlord/tenant situation I was…read moreinformed that they only represented landlords. As it turned out, they represented my landlord and gave me only one day to file for a continuance to prepare my case. Underhanded and unethical practice. Do not even think about hiring an attorney from this firm if you are a tenant.

    Deconcini McDonald Yetwin & Lacy, PC - estateplanning - Updated May 2026

    Loading...
    Loading...
    Loading...