*** UPDATE in response to the firm's comment below: ***…read more
What prospective clients are reading below is a masterclass in clumsy damage control and textbook panic from a law firm caught completely flat-footed.
Every single move they attempted below followed a predictable playbook line for line, complete with hilarious blunders:
1. The Manufactured Timeline Lie: The firm opens by claiming this is a "second review following our response to his first review." That is a demonstrable fabrication designed to manipulate perception. Both of my reviews were posted BEFORE I received so much as a private email from Marilyn, and long before this clumsy public reply. Inventing a fictional cause-and-effect to paint a paying client as an escalating aggressor is brazenly dishonest.
2. The Retainer Deception: Claiming I "sought to retain them again" is pure manipulation. They still held my active retainer in trust to enforce the very decree they drafted. I didn't hire them anew; they were already sitting on my cash.
3. The Pronoun Comedy: Multiple legal professionals cobbled together this response and couldn't even coordinate pronouns, clumsily flip-flopping between the corporate "We will not engage" and Marilyn's wounded "At no time did I advise" and "Ultimately I determined." You'd think lawyers could proofread basic grammar before lecturing the public.
4. "We Will Not Engage" (Followed by a 400-Word Manifesto).
5. The Sanitized "Termination": The response delicately claims, "Ultimately, I determined that I could no longer effectively represent him." What they conveniently omit is the sheer cowardice of how they did it: they dumped a high-stakes client via a Monday morning text message from an administrative assistant; the first business day after being caught pushing a reckless quitclaim deed on a $5.8M underwater note.
6. "Standing By" Incompetence: The firm closes with, "We stand by the representation provided." Let the public reflect on what you are actually standing by: you are publicly standing by steering a client to sign away property rights while remaining 100% personally liable on a $5.8M debt; you are standing by offering zero strategy for commercial guarantor exposure; and you are standing by abandoning a client via an administrative text message. When legal professionals proudly "stand by" that level of negligence in broad daylight, it isn't integrity; it is the breathtaking spectacle of a firm publicly endorsing its own incompetence. Prospective clients should take them at their word and run.
*** UPDATE in response to the firm's comment below: ***
If your Divorce involves high financial stakes, personal exposure, or complex lending, steer completely clear of Marilyn Brown / Moody Brown Law.
I retained her while navigating a $5.8M commercial loan guarantee that is roughly $1.7M underwater. From day one, her representation was defined by dreadfully slow, evasive, and inefficient communication--dragging out simple issues and running up billable hours while offering zero strategic clarity.
But the real danger wasn't just the wasted money; it was her shocking incompetence. Right up until the day before she dropped me, she was steering me to sign a quitclaim deed. I had to be the one to educate my own lawyer on basic real estate and banking reality: signing a quitclaim deed surrenders my title and ownership rights while leaving me 100% personally on the hook for millions in debt.
At the same time, she flatly refused to address my questions regarding my rights, risk mitigation, and compensation as the guarantor carrying all the downside. The moment she realized I saw through her terrible advice and held her feet to the fire, she acted offended, played dumb, and abruptly terminated representation.
I anticipate the firm's standard, sterile response to this review, so let me dismantle it right now:
* Do not let her hide behind "client confidentiality" to avoid the facts. Privilege belongs to the client, and I am putting the facts on the table. She hides behind silence because her advice is indefensible.
* Do not let her spin raw incompetence as "delivering hard truths." Handing away property rights while remaining personally liable on an underwater note isn't a "hard truth"--it is malpractice-level advice.
* Do not let her claim she was merely "exploring options." That reckless quitclaim deed was the only strategy she put on the table.
* Do not let her dress up cowardly abandonment as an "ethical duty to withdraw." She didn't withdraw over an "ethical breakdown in communication"--she panicked, cut, and ran the second she got caught giving disastrous advice to a client who knew better.
When millions of dollars are on the line, you need a sharp, accountable advocate. Marilyn Brown burned my money, pushed a catastrophic strategy, and ran for the nearest hole the second she was exposed.