Timothy A. Provis

I represented myself (pro se) in my L&I claim against and assistant attorney general lawyer, before the BIIA and superior court. As one might figure, I lost. I don't know of many cases where a pro se wins against a lawyer especially a lawyer from the Office of the Attorney General. I sought information via AVVO.com. Attorney Provis responded, was the first to respond and was clear and concise in his response. His response is one of the better; if not the best, response I read on AVVO and trust me when I say I read many posts and responses before I posted. If Attorney Provis practiced in WA State, I would definitely seek consultation with him to represent me!

Mr. Provis offerred a valuable assesment of my personal legal issue free of charge, but most importantly, he wasted no time and addressed the exact issue which I presented to him. He was informed, descriptive, and helpful to my clear and present need. Thank you Mr. Provis.

On August 4, 2022 Federal District Judge William Conley entered Judgement against attorney Provis requiring Provis to pay $31,963.21 plus judgment interest to persons Provis had sued in a frivolous lawsuit. Frivolous means there were no fact supporting the story Provis made up in the suit. Judge Conley also found that Provis filed the suit for an improper purpose, namely, to allow his client to carry on a years’ long vendetta of harassment and threats. Provis know his lawsuit was fraudulent but carried it on for eleven months. This suit, Upchurch v O’Brien et al 19-cv-165, Western District of Wisconsin, and others Provis is handling, e. g. Dane County case Burke v St. Paul’s et al 21-cv-1287, demonstrate that Provis is untrustworthy and repeatedly fails to follow rules of Court. In the Burke case, Provis was recently ordered to pay attorney’s fees and cost because he failed to perform discovery in accord with rules of court.