Not yet reviewed
Are you an attorney? Endorse this lawyer
I represented Ms. Renick in the Bar Court matter that resulted in the reproval displayed on this page, and I think she was unfairly treated. I'd encourage anyone reading this to contact me to discuss it. In my opinion, and the opinion of at least one Bar official of whom I am aware, this reproval should not have been imposed at all. The matter did not involve the practice of law in any way. I had prepared a motion to dismiss but was told by a Bar Court judge that he had "never heard of" such a motion being granted. Based on that statement we felt obligated to agree to the only settlement the Bar was willing to offer. That was unfair, and I think it is also unfair to simply show it as a red flag without any explanation of the circumstances. I would urge anyone viewing this profile to contact me to discuss this further. Ms. Renick is a talented lawyer who has been unfairly treated by the Bar, in my opinion.
Michael Underhill Litigation Attorney
431 El Caminio Real
Santa Clara, CA, 95050
This lawyer was disciplined by a state licensing authority.
A censure or reprimand issued by the Supreme Court or the State Bar Court that is not a matter of public record unless imposed after the initiation of formal disciplinary proceedings. No period of suspension is imposed. The reproval may be imposed with duties or conditions.
|Award name||Grantor||Date granted|
|American Jurisprudence Award - Contracts||University of Missouri - Kansas City||1999|
|American Jurisprudence Award - Employment Discrimination||University of Missouri - Kansas City||1999|
|Law Review||University of Missouri - Kansas City||1999|
|Senior Litigation Associate||Kutak Rock LLP||2006 - 2008|
|Litigation Associate||Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold LLP||2001 - 2005|
|Associate||Armstrong Teasdale||1999 - 2000|
|Legal Claims Assistant||Media Professional Insurance||1992 - 1997|
|Steadfast Ins. Co. v. Dobbas||Summary Judgment in Favor of NGLIC; settlement|
|Rozbicka v. City of Dana Point||Defense Verdict.|
|Oakland-Alameda Colisem, Inc. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA||Summary judgment in favor of defendant Zurich.|
|See all legal cases|
|University of Missouri - Kansas City School of Law||Law||JD - Juris Doctor||1999|
|University of Missouri, Kansas City||Business||Bachelor's||1996|