Ruth Slamon Borland

I retained Ruth for a temporary PFA and custody order that I was served with in August 2012. In November 2013 Ruth suggested we file a motion for a change of venue. She got it prepared, and waited another eight months before filing it. Ruth was unable to attend this hearing, and instead sent an ass...ociate. He had little to say as we were offered to have the case moved across the street. I was under the impression that we wanted the change of venue in order to move it out of the county where my wife, her attorney, and her law partner are all guardian ad litem attorneys. What really bothered me was when neither counsel thought to object to Judge Corbett's decision to have this hearing without the stenographer. Finally, December 2014, a hearing is set for the PFA. For the past 15 months Ruth never contacted any of my witnesses. Just three days before the hearing, Ruth could not reach the only witness she called. Then on the following day, one day before the hearing, Ruth takes a trip out of town. At the courthouse on the day of the hearing, Ruth and opposing counsel meet with the judge. The judge's best offer is a no fault PFA for three years. I asked about the 2-1/2 years I was forced to wait for this hearing, shouldn't there be some consideration for that time? The judge said no, it's either this or we have a hearing now. Ruth says, it is better if you take the judge's offer; or we could have the hearing now, if that is what I want. What I want? Go find me an attorney who is ready for trial, and prepared to defend her client. I asked if we could have this hearing continued. Ruth tells me the only way to get this hearing continued was to release her and tell the judge I need time to find alternative counsel. I felt backed into a corner and with no choice, I took her advice and accepted the deal. Soon after I told Ruth that she had failed me, and that I wanted a new hearing. Ruth backed her actions like I've never seen before, I wonder if she defends any of her clients as she would herself? For those entire 16 months Ruth represented me, she never got me one day of visitation with my son. It is because of that failure, my wife and her attorney have stopped the few visitations I just received; because they filed for a stay of visitation, where they have accused me of having no interest in seeing my son for the past 18 months. I expected Ruth to do the job she agreed to and with 40 years of experience, it surprised me that she handled my case so poorly. Surely, twenty-something continuances and one hearing in 16 months, is worth a round of applause. Hip hip, no way! "Try to fail and you will. Greatness is the opposite." MD