Cancel

Open app

Search

Tamara Rogers, Seattle Contracts Attorney

5.0 (4 reviews)
Open • 8:00 am - 8:00 pm

Services - Tamara Rogers, Seattle Contracts Attorney

IP and internet litigation

General litigation

Tamara Rogers, Seattle Contracts Attorney Photos

You might also consider

More like Tamara Rogers, Seattle Contracts Attorney

Recommended Reviews - Tamara Rogers, Seattle Contracts Attorney

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

9 years ago

Helpful 0
Thanks 0
Love this 0
Oh no 0
Photo of Jan P.
11
1
0

9 years ago

Helpful 0
Thanks 0
Love this 0
Oh no 0
Photo of Sam A.
26
5
3

9 years ago

Helpful 0
Thanks 0
Love this 0
Oh no 0

9 years ago

Helpful 0
Thanks 0
Love this 0
Oh no 0

Ask the Community - Tamara Rogers, Seattle Contracts Attorney

You might also consider

Verify this business for free

Get access to customer & competitor insights.

Verify this business

Dave von Beck, Attorney

Dave von Beck, Attorney

(3 reviews)

Downtown

TLDR: overly high hourly rate, did not get enough attention to our case to justify price…read more After we bought our house, we hired a foundation consultant to come evaluate a sunken corner of the dining room. He found evidence of rot and evidence of the previous owner covering it up with new wood. He recommended us to hire a real estate attorney and sue the seller since they should have disclosed the history of rot. We got a quote from a contractor for $50k for the repairs. Dave was very responsive by e-mail. He did not offer a free consultation and charges $575/h which is very high, but we thought the price might reflect the quality of work. However, his counsel was subpar. He reviewed our documents and pointed items noted by the inspector that were found in other areas of the house, unrelated to the area in question. When we were evidently very confused, he never offered a call to discuss the details. He kept insisting that we didn't really have a case, so we also didn't want to consume more of his time and burn our money. The demand letter that was drafted was not convincing at all, since Dave never took the time to understand the details. The seller was not convinced and hired their own attorney, at which point Dave advised us not to pursue them in court. That was the only time we talked on the phone. The subpar letter costed us $1,970. I feel like any attorney could have drafted a letter of this quality, even those who charge $300/h. Do not make the same mistake as me in assuming that higher rates equal higher quality of work.

I had a lawsuit filed against me as a corporate executive in a bankruptcy. My D&O coverage hired a…read morelawyer to defend me. I hired Dave to make sure the lawyer and the insurance carrier acted in my best interest. I'm so glad I did. Dave provided much needed guidance in my defense. He also went above and beyond to see that I received my $25k deductible back. He's aggressive, pro-active and well worth every penny. I would hire him again in a second if I had any need within his specialty or needed any advice as to who I might contact if my need fell outside his specialty. I trust him completely and that's not something I say lightly. Thank you Dave!

Haas Law

Haas Law

(13 reviews)

Pioneer Square

Lots of great reviews but honestly i think they were there just for the money or just hugely NOT…read morecompetent at all. I had an issues with an insurance claim, them denying my claim even though they couldn't prove they weren't liable. I was very clear from the start that my moving company made the insurance with the insurance company and that I did not have any documentation regarding the Pick-Up but only regarding my Drop-Off. 1. Phone consultation with Maureen, of course she can't predict the outcome but the consultation was quite specific as to know if there was a strong case, which she said there was, she also said the proof of being liable or not, was on the insurance company side that's why they have investigators. 2. Philip Haas calls, I find out that Maureen is not my lawyer but he will be, never spoke to him before and with a non-disclosed speech impediment that makes communication hugely hard (first bad sign, she should have contacted me telling me and asking if that was ok before taking a non refundable deposit). 3. You would think that if you change your clients lawyer without consulting with the client you'd provide every bit of information that very client provided you; NO, not the case, Philip Haas started doing his own without even consulting first and knowing half of the case; I got mad and made him aware of it and he apologized saying Maureen didn't send him the info (hugely unprofessional and once again a very bad sign); because I did send details by email there were no way you could dispute it so he wrote off what he charged me so far with whatever he did without consulting me first and then made out a strategy plan with me starting from zero (that was well appreciated but not encouraging). 4. If you know the case and set up a strategy but then a month later forget about details regarding that case...VERY BAD SIGN. Philip Haas blamed it on the fact they just had a new born and thanked me for reminding him the details of my case and because of that now he would re-contact the insurance company (he should have done that immediately as soon as he got another "claim denied"). 5. Out of the blue turns out that the burden of proof that the insurance company is liable or not, is on me and not on the insurance company so even though the insurance company can't prove they aren't liable, I have to prove they are by providing documents of the truck and driver that did my pick-up... SURPRISE! So my lawyer knowing from the start I did not have any documents alike as I specified from the beginning with Maureen, at the very end let's me know I have the burden of proof which, not having documents is clear that there is no case at all then, that's just common sense right? ... can you prove in a very specific way who the driver and truck type is? NO, you don't have a case, so why on earth would you take a case knowing there is no case? Because you mislead and was there for the money OR just were hugely incompetent not knowing what you were doing. Philip Haas insists they didn't mislead, which can be true but that just means they were hugely incompetent then, which one is it? A. The insurance company have to prove they are not liable and if they can't the burden for compensation is on them at least partially. (Maureen) -" knowing I didn't have documentation to prove specifics regarding the pick-up driver and truck type. Or B. You have to prove the insurance company is liable (even though you were insured) in order for them to compensate you by providing documents of who the driver and truck type was (Philip) Both are contradicting each other and therefore misleading or simply pure incompetence in the matter. Federal court? That was an option it would just have been hugely costly and time consuming and no guarantee of anythings pf course. Bad experience and a huge waste of money!

Wonderful experience It was absolutely a pleasure working…read morewith Haas Law. They took their time explaining everything in detail. I would definitely recommend using them as your lawyer.

Tamara Rogers, Seattle Contracts Attorney - contractlaw - Updated May 2026

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