Kurt A. Smith's Reviews

Avvo Review Score

4.4 /5.0

46 Client Reviews

Showing 16 - 18 of 18 reviews | Professionalism

Posted by Holly | March 17, 2016 | Hired Attorney | Lawsuits & Disputes

KEEP LOOKING

Think TWICE & move on before retaining this attorney! Especially if you expect professionalism, communication & value for your money. My first clue should have been the poorly written demand letter. Little wonder it didn't have the desired effect. Neither did my call to his office asking ...further action be put on hold. Oddly, Mr Smith continued ordering work be typed up which conveniently used up my retainer. His office manager couldn't resolve my concerns so she set up a phone conference at 1 pm. By 7pm, he hadn't called nor could I get any help from his staff. Don't be taken in by his calm demeanor & confidence. After the initial consult you'll never talk to him again. Also kiss your retainer goodbye when you give it to him. He'll find some reason to use it up, believe me!!

See Full Review Collapse Review

Kurt Smith

Replied last March 17, 2016

Holly is a client that first came to my office on June 23, 2015. She was having issues visiting with her grandkids that she felt had to be resolved by mid-July 2015. After listening to her issues, we developed a plan that included initiating a Grandparent's Rights Visitation action, filing a Motion for said visitation, and attempting to expedite the hearing with the Court so that her deadline could be met. I explained that it was imperative that we act immediately, as a failure to do so would result in the Court not having time to hear her case before her deadline. Holly fails to mention that despite her urgent need for legal services, she could only come up with a highly reduced retainer fee. Notwithstanding her need for expedited legal services and inability to come up with a full retainer, I agreed to take Holly's case. Holly hired my office on June 25, 2015, at which time I immediately assigned my staff to begin working on her case. On July 2, 2016, Holly changed the plan. Rather than immediately submitting the legal paperwork that we had drafted, Holly decided she would rather first send a Demand Letter to the opposing party. She then demanded to review the letter prior to its submittal. It was explained to Holly that 1) in this circumstance, a Demand Letter was unlikely to be effective and 2) changing the strategy mid-stream like this was likely going to make meeting her stated deadline impossible. Holly indicated that she understood and the new strategy was implemented. The Demand Letter was drafted and submitted to Holly, who sent it back with requested changes due to her fear that the tone of the demand letter was overly harsh and she didn't want to hurt the opposing party's feelings. The revisions Holly requested were made and the letter was submitted. Not surprisingly, Holly's Demand Letter was ineffective and Holly's deadline was missed. In fact, Holly's deadline came and went and Holly never gave the office the permission to file her legal papers. My office kept in touch with Holly over the next few months. Holly was having many of the same ups and downs with the opposing party that she was having prior to coming into my office. However, she could never quite bring herself to file the papers that we had drafted for her. On September 5, 2015, I emailed Holly informing her that we had not heard from her in a while and asking her what she wanted to do with her case. On September 7, 2015, Holly emailed me back asking us to hold off, as she was having second thoughts, but thanking us for the great work that we had done so far. On November 13, 2015, Holly contacted my office, informed us that she no longer wanted to proceed with her case, and asking for a refund of her retainer fee. My office manager informed Holly that she was entitled to a refund of all unused retainer fees, which at that point was $269.51. Holly became irate. She felt that even though she had hired my office to do legal work back in June and that my office, pursuant to her request, had drafted the legal documents requested, because she hadn't used the documents, she shouldn't have to pay for them. Holly claimed to have asked me to hold off on all work during one of our conversations about her case in August 2015 (so much for not being able to get a hold of me). Holly was reminded that she had hired our office in June 2015 and that we had begun our work immediately. Accordingly, even if Holly had requested us to stop work in August, she would have had to pay for the time spent drafting the legal documents for her in the June/July timeframe. To date, we have sent Holly a retainer refund check approximately three times. Holly keeps sending it back demanding a full refund. I appreciate Holly's compliment regarding my calm demeanor and confidence. We do excellent work, but we do need to be paid for the work that we do. We generally do not offer refunds for work that has already been completed.

Posted by Jeremy | October 15, 2015 | Child Custody

Worst Attorney Ever!!!!

DON'T USE THIS ATTORNEY!!! The State of Nevada referred me to Kurt as he was an affordable attorney. I needed someone to represent me in a custody battle. When I met with him for my consultation, he informed me that my case should not cost me more then $4,000. After receiving several bills with o...utrageous charges, I called to get information on why I was being charged so much. He informed me that they are inflating the price as they are going after my ex wife for my attorney fees. Once the case is closed they will reduce the price down to the quoted price if we don't get approved to have her pay for the fees. Once the case was all set and done we did not get approval to have her pay for the fees but yet he was not a man of his word and did not reduce his charges. So in the end he wants me to pay over $10,000. My ex wife paid her attorney $3,000 to do the same things Kurt did. He is a crocked individual. He has the nerve to charge my account $2,500 to have a fill in attorney and his paralegal defend me at one of the court dates. It is not my fault you decided to take a vacation when I had a court date and I should not be responsible to pay for his mistakes. Key point to this story, DO NOT USE THIS ATTORNEY AS YOU WILL NOT BE ANYTHING TO HIM BUT A DOLLAR SIGN AND HE WILL TELL YOU ANYTHING TO GET AS MUCH MONEY FROM YOU!!

See Full Review Collapse Review

Kurt Smith

Replied last January 13, 2015

Jeremy's review lends proof to the theory that no good deed goes unpunished. Jeremy came to my office as a low-income client that needed legal assistance. I agreed to help him and began working on his case for a severely reduced retainer fee. I also agreed to accept very low monthly payments on his case in an effort to get him the legal representation he needed within his very meager budget. Turns out, Jeremy and his wife had originally decided to get a fraudulent divorce in Nye County (using a different law firm) - fraudulent because neither party lived there at the time. Jeremy ended up needing to fight this case in both Nye County and Clark County - an unfortunate circumstance that greatly increased Jeremy's bill. Jeremy's wife used the same lawyer that had bungled the case in the first place. Jeremy's ex's counsel filed inappropriate motions in Nye County and when those proved ineffective, attempted to start the entire case over again in Clark County for what was effectively a third case. My firm competently handled all three cases and got the Jeremy the best result possible under the circumstances - circumstances which included allegations of drug use which ended up being true. By means of fact check, please be advised of the following: 1) My firm NEVER quotes a flat fee to handle an entire case. Jeremy's allegation that this occurred is false. 2) My firm NEVER inflates prices in hopes of having opposing counsel pay an inflated attorney's fees award. Attorney's fees are discretionary with the judge and doing so would cause severe problems. 3) I did not go on vacation in the middle of Jeremy's case leaving Jeremy hanging out to dry. I had hearings scheduled simultaneously in Clark County and Nye County. I handled the multiple hearings in Clark County and sent an Associate AND the Paralegal that was working on Jeremy's case to Nye County to represent him. Incidentally, we won the Hearing in Nye County. That notwithstanding, Jeremy expressed his dissatisfaction that I had not personally appeared at his Nye County Hearing. What Jeremy fails to state is that as a courtesy to him, I waived the entire fee for that Associate's time and the Paralegal's time and took that entire amount off of Jeremy's bill. 4) I am one of the few attorneys in town that will accept monthly payments on their cases. The reason for this is that most attorney's have figured out that people on monthly payments often stop paying their bill. Although I understand that as well, I often feel bad when people need help and just can't come up with a huge retainer fee to get the help they need. As I stated, I set Jeremy up on a very low retainer and a very low monthly fee. About halfway into Jeremy's representation, Jeremy informed me he could no longer pay the entire monthly fee and began paying me less than half of the previously agreed upon fee. That notwithstanding, I kept working on Jeremy's case. Jeremy assured me that he would keep paying his bill until his bill was paid. Unfortunately, that has not proved to be the case. 5) Jeremy misstates what I told him at our initial meeting. For the record, what I told him was "you keep doing your part and paying your monthly bill and I will keep doing my part and will keep representing you throughout these proceedings. At the end, we will sit down and discuss your bill and discuss a fee reduction to help get your bill paid off faster." When the successful end of Jeremy's representation came, Jeremy still owed my firm $6,794.81. He has only ever paid $3,100.00. AFTER the case was concluded, Jeremy informed me that he felt he had paid enough. Although I have offered Jeremy a SUBSTANTIAL fee reduction to help him out, Jeremy has stated that the only fee reduction he will accept is 100%. I understand there will always be people out there who will not want to pay. However, for me, getting Jeremy Joint Custody despite his drug issues was a good result for Jeremy.

Posted by anonymous | October 02, 2015 | Hired Attorney | Lawsuits & Disputes

A custody case client

Mr. Smith failed to show up for my court date and did not answer his phone or return e-mails or phone messages for several days. A new date was scheduled and when I did talk with him he had no reason for his no-show. Court went fine and then I received a bill for his fees to re-file and reschedule ...the court date! When he did not show up! I met with him and he agreed to drop those fees. Now, a year and a half later, I get a letter from a collection company to collect those fees! Run away from him and find an attorney who is reliable and trustworthy.

See Full Review Collapse Review

Kurt Smith

Replied last January 07, 2025

The client who posted this review neglected to leave their name, so it is very difficult to comment with any accuracy on the allegations in the client's review. That said, an unexcused failure to show up at a hearing is a very serious thing for a client, an attorney, and the Court. Those types of failures do not escape the Court's notice and the Court issues sanctions against attorneys for those types of failures. As I have never been sanctioned for missing a Hearing, it is difficult to believe that the statements being made here are accurate. What is true is that as attorneys, one of the things that we have very little control over is the scheduling of Hearings. The Courts set the dates and times of Hearings. Often times, due to attorneys having multiple clients, attorneys have multiple hearings scheduled at multiple times on the same day - sometimes at the same time. It is the attorney's job to effectively juggle those types of scenarios so that the client is impacted as little as possible. Attorneys do that through their relationships with the Courts as well as their relationships with opposing counsels. However, sometimes, despite our best efforts, Hearings run long in one courtroom making it impossible to make it to the next courtroom in a timely manner. Although judges are typically cognizant of those situations, there are those times when the judge's schedules will not permit a particular hearing to be "trailed" until the attorney is free from his other obligation. In those situations, however, the Courts will give the attorney the opportunity to reschedule the Hearing for another date. That is what appears to have happened in the above-listed scenario. As the client states, "court went fine" and the Hearing date was rescheduled. In those scenarios, however, as stated by the client, my office is ALWAYS happy to waive any fees associated with the missed Hearing date. Such is acknowledged by the client above. The misleading part of the client's review is the part that he/she received a bill for the fees that were waived for the missed Hearing. Again, because the client failed to post his/her name, it is impossible to go back and check and make things right if that were the case (which is highly unlikely.) What is much more likely is that my office finished the case in question and the client in question had an outstanding bill that they simply stopped paying on - a bill that included work that was done over and above the missed hearing, which appears to have been credited to the client's bill. In such a case, my office makes every attempt to collect on the monies that are owed without the need to employ the services of collection companies, although sometimes those steps are necessary. However, to the above-listed unnamed client, I make the same promise that I make to all of my clients. If there is something on your bill that doesn't look right, you have but to call my office and I will be happy to review it with you and remove it from your bill as appropriate. If there are outstanding balances owed, I am happy to work with you on that as well. I look forward to hearing from you one-on-one so that we can get this situation cleared up and rectified to your satisfaction.

See All Client Reviews

« First ‹ Prev 1 2 3 4

Kurt A. Smith's Lawyer Endorsements

Endorse Kurt

Carol Barnes

Family lawyer | Jun 21

Relationship: Opposing Counsel on matter

"I endorse this lawyer. Kurt is a knowledgeable and compassionate attorney who zealously advocates for his client. As opposing counsel, Kurt always promptly responded to my calls and worked toward resolution."

Mark Clay

Family lawyer | Aug 23

Relationship: Fellow lawyer in community

"I highly endorse Mr. Smith. Truly exceptional and caring attorney who produces great results in representing clients! I want all people with legal problems to contact him first."

John Fisher

Family lawyer | Jul 04

Relationship: Fellow lawyer in community

"I endorse this lawyer. Intelligent and compassionate with superior communication skills."

Jonathan Lacour

Family lawyer | Apr 27

Relationship: Fellow lawyer in community

"I endorse this lawyer. Quality representation and exceptional attentiveness to clients."

Brandon Leavitt

Family lawyer | Mar 17

Relationship: Opposing Counsel on matter

"Mr. Smith is a highly skilled and competent attorney. He is courteous and professional and does an excellent job zealously representing his clients. He his a credit to our profession and I am pleased to call him my friend and colleague."