Skip to main content
Paul Austin Hoffman

Paul Hoffman’s reviews

     1.5 stars 3 total

Review Paul Hoffman
  • Heavy Billing and Petty lawyer

    1.0 star

    Anonymous review posted on

    was a client of Greenwald & Hoffman (Paul Evan Greenwald and Paul Austin Hoffman) of Santa Ana CA for approx. 3 years. They represented several entities that I had some involvement with, and they represented me and my family as well. We treated them well, and referred paying clients to them. They abandoned me last minute during discovery, but not after billing me close to $40k for a case that settled for a fraction of this amount - not as a result of their work, which was in my and my new attorney's view minimal. Then, they sued me for their fees after the statute of limitations expired. This is shameful behavior. i am not posting my name out of concern for retribution, which both of Greenwald and Hoffman have threatened.

  • Greenwald & Hoffman Not Recommended

    2.0 stars

    Posted by NRG Resources, Inc.

    NRG Resources, Inc. engaged Greenwald & Hoffman LLP of Santa Ana, CA in connection with various legal disputes including a lawsuit against several former executives and consultants, who also counter-sued our company. Paul E. Greenwald and Paul A. Hoffman urged us to switch from Sheppard Mullin, a large law firm that had been representing us in this and other litigation matters together with Greenberg & Traurig.

    Several weeks before trial, a dispute developed between us and Paul E. Greenwald and Paul A. Hoffman regarding the amount of their bills, which we believed were excessive. It was a very stressful time for our company. Indeed, even though we had paid Greenwald & Hoffman high six figures in fees, they threatened to withdraw from the case only a few weeks before trial if we did not pay them in full their latest bill. They followed through on the threat, and left us only a few weeks before trial. By doing so Paul Greenwald and Paul Hoffman put our company and us in an extremely difficult and uncertain position, and we had to scramble to find a lawyer on the eve of trial to save our case. To add insult to injury, Greenwald and Hoffman then sued us for fees they alleged we still owed, but waited until after the statute of limitations for professional malpractice expired presumably in order to avoid the possibility of getting sued by us.

    Although some aspects of the service Greenwald & Hoffman provided were adequate, we believe that Greenwald & Hoffman turned out to be more expensive than the big firms we had relied on in the past. The bottom line is that the value to benefit ratio did not work for us with Greenwald & Hoffman.

    Overall we did not have a good experience with Paul E. Greenwald and Paul A. Hoffman of Greenwald & Hoffman. We were not pleased with the value or results, and we would not recommend them.

    Paul Austin Hoffman’s response: “This is a posting by a former disgruntled client who owed us money and did not want to pay it. I cannot comment on the specifics of the cases we handled for them because of the attorney/client privilege, but I can say that what is being said above is not true. We do not overbill. Also, we put them in a strong position to win their case, which saved them a lot of money, because of the work we did for them before we withdrew.”
  • Paul Hoffman Zero Personality Overbilling

    1.0 star

    Posted by Ron

    Our Company hired Greenwald & Hoffman for partnership dispute. Most of the work was delegated to Paul Hoffman, who is Paul Greenwald's partner in this two lawyer Santa Ana law firm partnership. Paul Hoffman had a difficult time relating to the issues, and a great deal of communication was with Greenwald. This was awkward. I cannot say that Hoffman was inexperienced, but we were billed 30% higher than the amount in dispute. Economically this made no sense, and I felt that Paul Hoffman overlawyered this matter. I learned that Greenwald & Hoffman were sued several times by former clients, and can imagine why.

    Paul Austin Hoffman’s response: “This comment is entirely false. This is not a description of a client that I ever had. It would be nice if he or she identified himself, but I suspect that is not being done because this person knows the accusation is not true and is just trying to defame me. This is probably a lawsuit opponent who is angry about the result of his or her case and is retaliating because he or she does not know what else to do.”