Gerald Harvey Stewart

1) In general, Mr. Stewart is something of a dinosaur when it comes to his practice. Whereas younger attorneys have already modernized with a fair amount of online processing of cases - such as electronic signatures on attorney/client agreements and so forth - Mr. Stewart is stuck in the dark ages. ... When I got onboarded with his "firm" (if you could call it that), he could barely operate email. From what I recall, he didn't even have an email that went to his domain. Just something at SBCglobal.net or whatever. (Totally unprofessional) 2) Mr. Stewart is also something of an abusive Svengali - well, more like the hard-sell sales manager at a car dealership. As far as my case was concerned, as a motorist, I was struck by an airplane while driving down the freeway. I was nearly crushed and burnt alive. It was utterly traumatic and I highly doubt any other single person has survived such an event. However, when I mentioned to Mr. Stewart that I planned to go with another attorney because he stated he had experience with "accidents" in the aviation industry, Mr. Stewart stated that didn't matter and that it was an insurance claim 'plain and simple' and that HE was supremely adept at handling such 'plain and simple' cases. 3) However, in the course of meeting with Mr. Stewart and signing his client-attorney agreement, he stated that I should forward him a list of my incidentals (such as my rental car reimbursement, the deductible left unpaid by the car insurance, and the other items destroyed and/or lost by having an airplane striking my vehicle at over 100 MPH). I did as Mr. Stewart instructed, and he came back to me and said the insurance company wouldn't reimburse me for ANYTHING until the NTSB report was published. Moreover, Mr. Stewart then proceed to insult me and denigrate me. He said, things like, "Well, if you want to spend TENS OF THOUSANDS of dollars doing YOUR OWN report and conducting YOUR OWN investigations, GO AHEAD!" Of course, Mr. Stewart was intending to be abusive and insulting toward me by saying such things. If I had hired this self-proclaimed 'wizard' on a contingency basis, how was I supposed to have advanced all these investigative costs. Mr. Stewart's proposition to me was absurd and totally abusive. 4) Since Mr. Stewart failed completely to obtain any recovery for my incidentals, I took it upon myself to contact the pilot of the plane (which had nearly turned me into road-smush). I informed the pilot he was on the verge of a small claims actions for these incidentals. After having received my letter, the pilot then groused to his insurance company who then groused to Mr. Stewart. Finally, Mr. Stewart called me up and, in essence, embarrassed him because as an attorney he was expected to keep his client "under control." This is the problem with these personal injury attorneys. They think that the client is something "to be controlled," rather than an injured party whose interests should be zealously advocated for. When I hired Mr. Stewart, he had me convinced he was going to fight for me. He had me convinced he was STRONG. But he's not strong. In fact, he even told me that he doesn't actually litigate cases. He said that if the case has to be litigated, he would just farm that out. In all good conscience, I had to fire Mr. Stewart. Mr. Stewart is not a fighter. And he's barely a paper-pusher in my opinion. He could barely operate email. Deep down, Mr. Stewart might have a good heart, but to me he was utterly useless.