Fallon Brenna Zirpoli

This review reflects my personal experience and opinions, and is supported by the allegations and dates set out in my publicly filed civil complaint in Broward County. I retained Attorney Fallon Zirpoli as part of my criminal-defense team. What I needed was conflict‑free, diligent, and transparent... advocacy. What I experienced instead was a pattern that—based on my documentation—undermined those fundamentals. Conflicts and nondisclosure. When I asked directly about ties to a key adverse witness, Ms. Zirpoli denied any connection. I later discovered (and pleaded) that she had an academic affiliation that should have been disclosed (a Nova Law Review tie). In my view, that was a material relationship that raised a significant risk of a “material limitation” and required full disclosure and my informed consent before the representation continued. The denial and omission are specifically identified by date in my complaint. Candor and communication. My complaint details that major strategic choices affecting impeachment and context were made without my informed consent—including decisions that curtailed the use of impeachment/exculpatory material and kept crucial family‑court background from the jury. Even when filings bore co‑counsel’s name, Ms. Zirpoli did not correct course, ensure my objectives were honored, or secure written consent for significant limitations. Those omissions, in my view, breached the basic duties of loyalty, candor, and communication I was owed. Why this matters to you. Criminal cases turn on credibility and independence of counsel. A lawyer must disclose personal/professional ties that could color judgment, obtain your informed consent in writing for conflicted or limiting decisions, and communicate frankly about risks and tradeoffs. My experience with Ms. Zirpoli fell short on those points, as laid out with dates, places, and supporting facts in my complaint. Impact. The combination of nondisclosure and unilateral strategic limits caused concrete harm: additional legal expense, reputational damage, and a materially weaker defense than a conflict‑free, fully informed strategy would have provided. Those consequences are set out in the pleading and are the basis for my claims for breach of fiduciary duty, fraudulent concealment/constructive fraud, and negligent misrepresentation as to her conduct. Bottom line. If you value independence, transparency, and client‑first judgment, I cannot recommend Attorney Fallon Zirpoli. In my opinion, her handling of conflicts and client communication did not meet the standard I expected or the duties described in my complaint. Prospective clients should ask very direct questions about potential relationships with witnesses or opposing counsel and demand written conflict disclosures and consent before proceeding.