I worked with Mr.Mclain a few years ago. I was having a hard time deciding on a lawyer to help me get my retirement from the Air Force. I had been the victim of a sexual assault and the Air Force decided to give me a medical discharge for PTSD. I was very upset and didn't feel I should be the one hav...ing to leave the Air Force. I had no idea what kind of rights I would have. I knew I would need a knowledgable attorney to help me. After a lot of research, I found Mr.Mclain. He was very reassuring on the phone, I told him about my situation, and he knew exactly what we needed to do. He said he could help me, and I flew into San Antoino for my court date. We met briefly and talked about the case, and I felt confident that I had picked the right person for the job. The court day went smoothly, and Mr.Mclain knew the questions to ask and was prepared to fight for my behalf. I think the officers there that day were even impressed by him. I was awarded my retirement and was very pleased with Mr. Mclain's services. I think that although the money was a little out of my budget, it was well spent and I have no regrets! Even now, three years later, he stays in touch to see how I am doing. Mr. Mclain not only is a great attorney, but he really cares for his clients and prior service members. He will do whatever he can to seek justice. If you need someone on your side , to fight for your rights, this is the man for the job. He surely is someone I will never forget, and could never thank enough!

I will start my review by saying I really like Patrick and his office staff. He and his staff are very responsive to requests and inquires. He’s a damn good lawyer. My case, in my opinion, was not a particularly difficult one; the government declined courts martial opting for an Administrative Boa...rd instead. -Patrick is a fighter. I think he loves the verbal combat involved with defending his clients, especially when he feel like they’re being screwed. - For me, I don’t feel like I clearly understood the direction Patrick wanted to go with my case. I didn’t understand the overall strategy and direction to counter the government’s assertions. Perhaps, this approach was to keep from going down the rabbit hole but, I wish I had a little more direction and clarity. -I did not feel particularly prepared to testify in my case. The pyschodrama was expensive ($3K), but helpful. I don’t think there was enough “red teaming”, getting in the mind of the government, to prepare me to see the direction the government would go. This point is related to the previous points about overall strategy. - My case was built on emotional responses and, I don’t feel like the exculpatory facts of the case were highlighted in the way I was hoping. Being exonerated was important but, the basis on which I was exonerated was important to me. I can’t (and am not) complain(ing) because the result, overall, was favorable. -There was a shotgun approach to witness testimony. There was no real direction or strategy. I gave a list of people as character witnesses for me. Some witnesses had material facts about the climate in the command to which I was attached. I don’t think it was anticipated the board may ask my character witnesses facts and opinions about the people who made the accusations against me. I wish some of these people would have been disposed so that we could have had more insight to what they were going to say. There was one person who seemingly tried to provide (completely unfounded) reasons for “why” the incident took place. I think had we know this was the direction this witness would go, we could have dropped him and got another witness who was actually in the command at the time the alleged incident took place and would’ve have provided some exculpatory information and opinions to cast the person at the center of the government’s case in a completely different light. - I don’t feel like I was involved in or really asked to provide any relevant ideas about the case. I was just on a guided tour. Perhaps this is my fault, as I’m not really an assertive person, especially as it relates to someone as I see in charge. I wrote a pretty detailed response to the report used as the basis of the government’s case. I got no real feedback on the points I raised and, I didn’t really ask. As I said, it worked out, overall, but, I would’ve like to have a complete exoneration. I felt like I was “let off” because the board members felt sorry for me instead of reviewing and depending the facts of the case. -Like I said Patrick is a good lawyer and will fight for you. I think the level of interaction will depend on the level of complexity as it relates to the case.