Based on 5 reviews
Help make it easier for other Avvo users to choose the right lawyer by sharing your experience with this attorney. It's fast, simple, and safe.
Lawyers: Use the Peer Endorsements section to provide input about other attorneys.
Some time ago Mr. Tanick handled an employment matter for me with the University of Minnesota. I thought he handled the matter quite well and was conscientious and easy to stay in touch with. If you look into Mr. Tanick's background and experience you will find someone who is well respected in his field. He also has a reputation in labor and employment law that is helpful in dealing with such matters. Especially at an institution such as the University of Minnesota. It is great to have a lawyer like Marshall "in your corner."
After I was terminated from my job of twenty years, he helped me get unemployment from an administrative hearing, then helped me get $9,000 sick pay my employer had refused to pay. He used mediation to reach a settlement that ended up covering my legal fees and then some. Without him, I'd have been in a very bad place.
Mr. Tanick accepted my case, cashed my checks, then did nothing for me. I NEEDED someone to REPRESENT ME in an unemployment insurance claim and while the opposition was grilling and killing me during my telephoned hearing, Mr. Tanick was reading papers for what I assume was another case, eating nuts, and oh yeah...standing out in the hallway. My hearing lasted for a couple of days and he did no fighting whatsoever for me.
Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility â€“ Complaint form:
As stated by Mr. Tanick, he consented to â€œcontacting the newspaper editor with a view of trying to obtain a retraction, correction, or other clarification regarding the false attribution to you of the â€œdisruptive,â€ â€œdysfunctionalâ€ quotation, which you never made about the local Republican party, and related matters.â€ Our initial consultation was on September 24, 2010. As if this date (September 2011), only a draft letter has been written by Mr. Tanick. Nothing further has been billed to my account since as he states in his e-mail dated 10-4-2010: â€œYou have paid a $350 consultation fee, which we appreciate, along with a $750 advance payment, which should be credited to this matter.â€
By not acting in a timely manner, my reputation continues to be unfairly blemished.
Complaint is in process of adjudication by the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility as of September 2011.
Mr. Tanick stated in his letter dated April 27, 2011 that "As I wrote to you previously, I did not 'tie up the loose ends' by following up with the Editor."
Mr. Tanick's attorney for this matter stated in May 2011 that all moneys would be refunded if I would terminate my Counciliation Court claim which I did. I have waited nearly three months after the "check had been cut" to receive my promised refund. It appears that Mr. Tanick will not follow through with his promised resolution of my claim. I have refiled my Councilation Court claim after no action by Mr. Tanick nor his attorney to settle ths matter.
We got connected with Mr. Tanick through his online business inquiry, and he reviewed our case, then called us by saying "I will take your case", and then provided to us his thinking of what he would do with the case. The next day, we were in his MPLS office for one hour, we did not learn anything about our case and his advices within that hour, but instead, we learned and obtained 20 pages of his previous OPINION and newspaper publications, of cause, we have to pay him the LAWYER fee. Before we left, we gave him additional pages of case related documents we wanted him to review, and he said he would do it in his spare times. The following day, we called him again and hoped that by then he would be finished his reading and would generated some good ideas about how to proceed with the case, but to our great surprise, he said he did not take any paper from us, he was busy and needed to go. After that we never heard anything from him any more.
Lawyers are hungry for cases, some charges you for the first time interview, some don't. In this case, Mr. Tanick lured customer by saying "I will take you case", then take the money, run away fast without doing anything significant to us, made us fully understand what 'Ripple Off" means, especially to someone who just lost job and faced financial difficulty. Mr. Tanick seriously violated his professional code of conduct, and need to be condemned by his bad behave. Really shamed of you!