Christopher Robert Burke

In Feb of 2017 my mother passed away suddenly and with no will or estate planning. Mr. Burke was very professional and accommodating. Myself, as well as my siblings were all from out of town. He made it very easy to settle all my mothers affairs despite the distance, especially during this emotion...al time. I would recommend him without hesitation.

In September 2011, Christopher R. Burke, an attorney in Schenectady, was counsel for my lawsuit against the City of Schenectady, 2 detectives of the SPD and a breach of contract lawsuit vs. Union College. Mr. Burke failed to use an enormous amount of documents that shed negative light on the defendan...ts He represented the defendants rather than me, his client. • Christopher R. Burke failed to submit a breach of contract complaint v. Union College to the Court by the deadline of August 2, 2012. • Christopher R. Burke failed to inform me in writing about the amount of settlement offered by the City of Schenectady and/or Union College on June 8, 2012, as I requested. • As recently as June 29, 2013, Christopher R. Burke completely ignored my request sent to him by registered mail for an accounting in writing of the settlement with Union College and/or the City. • To protect the defendants, Mr. Burke cited that it is documented that my false confession was the reason for my dismissal. No such document exists. • Mr. Burke claimed a 500-word article written in the Union College newspaper about me with 9 documented lies was not libelous or slanderous. • Mr. Burke claimed, “The alleged false arson report of Michael Hilton was not a felony.” The false arson report was used to pressure Det. Michael Brown into charging me, a totally innocent person, with a felony. ACCORDING TO THE HON. JUDGE VINCENT REILLY’S RULING, THE LAWSUIT AGAINST THE DEFENDANTS \WAS DISMISSED BECAUSE MY ATTORNEY, CHRISTOPHER R. BURKE FAILED TO PROPERLY REPRESENT ME, HIS CLIENT. 1. The original amended complaint entered by Christopher R. Burke against the City defendants alleged causes of actions sounding in negligence, negligent infliction of emotional distress and defamation. Mr. Burke stated, “they do not oppose the dismissal of his negligence, negligent infliction of emotional distress and defamation causes of action.” 2. “When Christopher R. Burke entered a cross motion to serve a second amended complaint asserting causes of action sounding in malicious prosecution and intentional infliction of emotional distress, that the cross motion to seeking new causes of action was served 6 weeks prior to trial. Christopher R. Burke failed to provide any explanation for the delay in asserting the malicious prosecution and intentional infliction of emotional distress causes of action.” 3. The charges prosecuted against me, their client resulted in a contemplation of dismissal (ACOD). Judge Reilly pointed out “that it is well established that an ACOD does not constitute a termination in plaintiff’s favor for the purposes of a malicious prosecution cause of action.” Therefore, “leave to serve a second amended complaint asserting a malicious prosecution cause of action was denied.” 4. Judge Reilly stated that Mr. Burke “had already agreed to the dismissal of the defamation claim and the court had already determined that the facts of this cause do not support a malicious prosecution cause of action.” 5. Due to the manner in which Mr. Burke handled my case, I was completely denied the opportunity to bring a lawsuit against the defendants. 6. The following issues were never addressed: • Brown and Sims denied my request for legal counsel. • To get my false confession Brown challenged my masculinity as a 19 year old; made promises to me that were never kept; and Sims used the Reid Method of Interrogation to brainwash me. Under oath Sims admitted that he knew my false confession was not true. • When I had an epileptic seizure in his presence, Brown totally failed to follow the standard operating procedure of calling EMS. • Brown admitted under oath that he had nothing on me. During a Huntley hearing Brown lied 16 documented times under oath in an effort to create a case when there was no case. The bottom line is: the TRUE FACTS of my case never got to court. I have documentation that supports each and every one of these statements.