No Photo

Richard Paul Fisher

1.0
Rating: 6.7

Licensed for 33 years

Employment and labor Lawyer at Gold River, CA
Practice Areas: Employment & Labor

2366 Gold Meadow Way Ste 20, Gold River, CA

About Richard

Practice Areas

1

Practice Area

Fees and Rates

We have not found any cost information for this lawyer


Looking for an attorney? Avvo can help.

search module image

Search our directory

Quickly connect with top attorneys through our legal directory to get help with your legal issue.

chat module image

Avvo's live chat agents can help coordinate a consultation with a local attorney.

Chat with a live agent who can match you with the right attorney for your legal needs.

Chat with

Licenses

Licensed in California for 33 years

State: California

Acquired: 1992

Active

No misconduct found

Location

Goyette & Associates

2366 Gold Meadow Way Ste 20, Gold River, CA, 95670-4471

Ad

Transform legal challenges into solutions.

Connect now to review your situation.

The Avvo Rating explained

display-bg

The Avvo Rating explained

Richard Paul Fisher's Reviews

Avvo Review Score

1.0 /5.0

1 Client Review

Filter Avvo Reviews (1) Refine reviews to match your needs. Use the filters to quickly surface reviews that align with your case or priorities.
Star rating
5 stars 0
4 stars 0
3 stars 0
2 stars 0
1 star 1
Practice Areas

Showing 1 - 1 of 1 review | General Knowledge

Posted by anonymous | August 07, 2017 | Hired Attorney | Employment & Labor

Bad Experience, Beware

My partner and I decided to share our experience with the hope that it might assist others who, like us, find themselves in need of an employment lawyer. We hired Richard P. Fisher of Goyette & Associates to defend me against the actions of my employer, who claimed I had quit voluntarily despite ...my medical disability status. We were aware of Mr. Fisher’s $300 hourly rate; however, before he would begin working on my case, he asked us to pay a $1200 “deposit” to the firm. All this despite that fact that the hearing was scheduled for the next day, and, according to Mr. Fisher’s own stated prediction, as we recall it, he would only need about one hour of preparation. At the same time, Mr. Fisher told us that, in all likelihood, the entire $1200 would not be spent. This was welcome news to us, as we’d explained to Mr. Fisher that due to my medical disability I have been out of work and without a salary for many months, thus this is a very significant expense for us right now. During the hearing with my employer, which I ended up losing, we believe that Mr. Fisher failed to raise an important point in my defense. We then filed for appeal, in which he was supposed to represent me. When I nicely contacted Mr. Fisher with the information he had failed to bring up, instead of offering to look into it or owning up to his mistake, he claimed that he had used up all the money from the $1200 deposit and that the firm would need to charge me for “additional hour or two” for him to conduct “research” on the point he had failed to bring up. He should of know the answer to this general question. As a doctor, if I charged extra for every diagnostic possibility, I would be a rich man. Later on, Mr. Fisher’s secretary asked us if we want to hire Mr. Fisher for the appeal. I struggle with chronic illness and I was ill at the time, which I told him, saying that I would respond to him shortly. In the same day, Mr. Fisher abruptly and unkindly informed me that was terminating his representation of my case. He said he had also informed the appeals board that he would not be representing me at the appeal. We found this behaviour to be repugnant. In his work with us as an employment lawyer, Mr. Fisher was hired to do work that involves serious, life-changing decisions for people when they’re at their most vulnerable: when they’re sick and disabled. We wrote to Mr. Fisher as well as to the head of the firm with our experience and asked for accountability and repair for the damages done (e.g., the appeal was scheduled at a date that was too late to address important related issues, of which Mr. Fisher was informed). We received brief responses which did not address or solve the issues we raised. Moreover, we believe their mail contained inaccuracies, as well as an attitude that to us seemed arrogant and dismissive (especially on Mr. Fisher’s part). When we pointed out these issues and asked again for a substantial response which kindly addressed our concerns, we heard nothing back. Our lawyer assisting us with our disability matter called Mr. Fisher several times, as he needed some important information related to our case. He, too, received no response from Mr. Fisher. To this day we have not heard anything from Mr. Fisher. We and our disability lawyer have made several attempts to receive any acknowledgement from Mr. Fisher of the issues we raised, or a serious effort to hear our experience and to work things out, but we have been unsuccessful. We are left with the unpleasant but seemingly necessary tasks of writing online reviews and filing a complaint with the bar association. As a result of our experience, we do not recommend this firm; least of all, Mr. Fisher. It should also be noted that his firm accidentally copied us in an email meant for another client, so we can neither vouch for their effectiveness regarding confidentiality and secure communications.

See All Client Reviews

Richard Paul Fisher's Lawyer Endorsements

Endorse Richard

No Endorsement Data Available Yet
This attorney hasn't received any attorney endorsements recently on Avvo.

No Endorsement Data Available Yet
This attorney hasn't created any attorney endorsements recently on Avvo.

Experience

Rating:  6.7 (Good)

Education

N/A

University of California at Davis School of Law

N/A

University of California - Santa Barbara

Avvo Rating

Our Rating is calculated using information the lawyer has included on their profile in addition to the information we collect from state bar associations and other organizations that license legal professionals. Attorneys who claim their profiles and provide Avvo with more information tend to have a higher rating than those who do not.

What determines Avvo Rating?
  • Experience & background Years licensed, work experience, education
  • Legal community recognition Peer endorsements, associations, awards
  • Legal thought leadership Publications, speaking engagements
  • Discipline Disciplinary information may not be comprehensive, or updated. We recommend that you always check a lawyer's disciplinary status with their respective state bar association before hiring them.
Avvo Rating Levels
10.0 - 9.0 Superb8.9 - 8.0 Excellent7.9 - 7.0 Very Good6.9 - 6.0 Good5.9 - 5.0 Average4.9 - 4.0 Concern3.9 - 3.0 Caution2.9 - 2.0 Strong Caution1.9 - 1.0 Extreme Caution