Daniel James Clanton

Daniel Clanton

Dear anonymous, My name is Clanton, not Clayton. I am board certified in family law and have fifteen years experience practicing in the DFW area. Family law is the only area of law I practice, so I am not sure why the heading of your review begins with patently false information. I do not recall having any consultation where I was unable to answer a basic divorce decree question. You go on to state that I informed you that I was uncertain if a judge would enforce the decree you sought to enforce. This could be a very valid opinion based on the language in the decree and the facts of the case. It also matters if the enforcement seeks contempt and jail time, vs. a money judgment or specific performance. The purpose of an initial consultation is to allow the attorney to review the relevant court orders, discuss the facts, and provide an opinion on the strengths and weaknesses of your case. I have zero recollection of this conversation that you allege occurred within the past few weeks (highly unlikely). That said, I am quite certain that if my opinion was that the court was unlikely to enforce the decree in the manner sought based on the facts of your case, then I was providing sound legal advice that perhaps you were not ready to hear. I do not get paid to tell people what they want to hear, I tell them the truth and my opinion on the strength of their case. It is far better to learn that during an initial consultation than after months of litigation and thousands of dollars have been spent. Perhaps this review would read better if it said ethical attorney saved me thousands of dollars by helping me avoid ill-advised litigation. I also do not have a "minimum of 10k" policy for any case. My retainer is $5,000.00, and replenishments become due if and when that retainer is exhausted. If asked to provide an estimate of what the litigation may cost, I do my best to give potential clients a ballpark idea of what the case may entail and what that could ultimately cost. However, there are too many variables in any case to accurately estimate the total cost or ultimate disposition of every issue. A point I emphasize during any discussion of how much the case will cost. Unfortunately, I have a hard time believing any of the allegations lobbied in this anonymous review. You stated that I "redacted" my original answers. This implies that I drafted an answer and subsequently redacted some of the language so that it could not be read. That certainly did not happen as my consultations are all verbal and nothing is drafted unless I have been retained to work on your case. You state that you chose not to hire me, so there is zero truth to the statement that any of my answers were redacted. If you hired my firm to perform legal services on your behalf and you were not satisfied with the quality of services provided, then an honest review of your experience would be welcome feedback and I would strive to improve in any area where you felt that we fell short. That is simply not the case here. The only thing I can address from your feedback is your impression that I did not take your legal matter seriously because in your opinion, it was not profitable enough. I assure you that is never the case. I take all of my client's legal matters seriously. If my advice to you was that your case was unlikely to prevail, that was to prevent you from wasting your time and money by pursuing a case with a low probability of success. That does not benefit me in any way, shape, or form. I practice the right way! My clients know that I do whatever I can to help. I have hundreds of former clients that have all provided overwhelmingly positive feedback. It is regrettable that you have taken what you allege was a 30-minute conversation ending in a decision not to retain my services, and turned it into a one star scathing indictment of my competence, professionalism, and moral compass. I respectfully disagree, but thank you for your feedback anonymous!