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.
The firm of Pierce and Shearer LLP had been recommended to me by another practicing attorney. I had a difficult EEOC Civil Rights case that I was prepared to fight . I was sure that my termination from a government agency, directly coincided with the date that I had applied for Disability Retirement. Peter Shearer, Jennifer Baker, and Matt Vandall worked tirelessly to help me prepare case materials. Their knowledge, talent and decency brought perspective and guidance to me during a very difficult time. Future clients will be putting themselves in excellent hands when hiring this firm.
I have worked with multiple lawyers from both top firms as well as small firms, and working with Peter was by far the best experience I have had with a lawyer. Contrary to the other reviews, I found his fees to be very reasonable for the service he provides. When I worked with Peter, he was actually very mindful of expenses and quite proactive about saving me dollars whenever possible.
What I like about Peter is that he is the type of lawyer that won't let up, which i found extremely reassuring. I have worked with a couple of other more passive lawyers in the past that costed me an arm and a leg and I wasn't very satisfied with them. He is very diplomatic but at the same time very tenacious. During my case, he made sure I never shortchanged myself or put myself at a disadvantage.
I think one of Peter's best qualities is that he is genuinely concerned for his clients, which is a rare thing in my expereince.
I am a current law student who engaged Pete for a very sensitive, complicated employment matter and have been working with him on and off for two years. The first question he asked was, "What can I do for you?" I had interviewed several attorneys before meeting Pete and each one only saw dollar signs and sought to exploit my situation for their gain. Pete was the opposite. Professional, engaging, sharp, and a wonderful advocate. I cannot imagine going through what I did without Pete on my side.
I have had two excellent experiences with Mr. Shearer, and highly recommend him for employment related matters.
Watch out for those quick communications that end up being an hour or more conversation...Pete needs to get to the point....not his forte....and make sure you know that you are being charged for pleasantries....at top rates. And even though Pete says he is in it for the "little" guy, Pete's frms bills, in the opinion of a lawyer reviewing them, shows he lost sight of an effective outcome for you...!
Pete processes everything through a case summary. Have it filled out and formatted as closely to what you think represents your case. He will put it into a format he can glance at but he will take hours to get it into a summary format. He says he is "analyzing the data "but he is really just reformatting everything and remember he is charging $375 for it. It seemed like an efficient way to engage until you see the bill for 10-20 hours in the first week (and that is just his time...).
Read the agreement carefully and put in stop-gap measures so you don't get a bill for tens of thousands of dollars and you don't even have a strategy in place. I've been told a lawyer has to notif yyou about any charges incurred over $2,000 but Pete's firm charges "hourly" and it adds up quickly. Also note that it isn't just Pete's time but also paralegals that don't seem necessary at the early stage of a case file review.
To save money, don't talk with Pete everytime there is a small amount of news...He will turn it into a half hour call and another $200 plus his time to notate the call....So then you have another hour or two.
Pete's background is in employment law but he defers to an equity specialist which means another legal bill outside of his firm.
So please know that the law is on your side but the billing system doesn't make it possible to pursue most matters under $100K effectively.
Pete's firm does not do contingency arrangements very often. It is a business decision for them to do so and know that if it is not worth it for Pete to pursue it on contigency, then it probably isn't worth it to do it with Pete's firm.
I'd say pursue other options for resolution of back and worth negotations It just doesn't seem financial worth it in the end and the strategy insights were not strong.
Sorry...can't offer a thumbs up or even a thumbs sideways....