Pamela S Chestek

In Dec 2016, I emailed Ms. Chestek to inquire about retaining her to pursue a copyright infringement claim. Although my goal was not to litigate, I’d been advised to retain a litigator in case negotiations fall through; therefore, I made perfectly clear that I was interested in retaining her as a lit...igator in S.D.N.Y. Court in the first paragraph of my email: “I understand that you are a litigator. I see from your website that you are admitted in New York. In S.D.N.Y. U.S. District Court?” And closed with, “Is this something you can help me with? If so, please provide your hourly rate and availability.” She replied, “yes, I am admitted to the Federal Court for the S.D.N.Y.” and provided her hourly rate. From her reply, I understood that she (1) is admitted to S.D.N.Y. Court, (2) is a litigator, and, hence, (3) was in a position to pursue my claim in that court. In Jan 2017, Ms. Chestek requested comparisons of the infringement for her “first step.” At no time did she inform me that she intended to keep them. Based on her above assurances, I provided four confidential files with a copyright notice at the bottom and appended Confidentiality and Legal notices. The confidentiality notice stated that my email and attached files contained information that was privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under the law; I did not waive any rights or privileges by sending the message; any unauthorized downloading was strictly prohibited by law. The legal notice stated that the information was protected from disclosure by N.C. Bar Rules 1.6 and 1.18. Not until the end of our phone mtg did Ms. Chestek tell me that she was not a litigator and therefore was not in a position to pursue my claim in S.D.N.Y. court. Dumbfounded, I asked what alternative she gave her clients if her negotiations were unsuccessful and I had to resort to litigating in S.D.N.Y. Court. She brushed off my concern by saying dismissively, “Oh, I could probably find someone in New York.” Her blithe, cavalier attitude was cause for concern. By then I had contacted many NY lawyers without success. Her response showed that she had intentionally deceived me by omitting the fact that she is not in fact a litigator despite my specifically asking if she was in Dec. I immediately emailed her for the names of NY lawyers to whom she could refer me and instead of complying with my request, she replied, “I suspect I am not the lawyer you are looking for, so I will be declining your case.” Her response told me that she could not in fact refer me to any such lawyers. From her failure to be forthcoming on 2 critical points on 4 separate occasions, I understood that she had repeatedly deceived me and I no longer trusted her. Her responses showed greed at the client’s expense and that if negotiations failed she intended to abandon my case. I immediately emailed her, requesting she delete the confidential files I had provided at her request. She did not reply. I repeated my request and 3 days later, she refused to do so. Her Jan email stating she would protect the confidentiality of my files failed to include the following: how she would do so, for how long before deleting them, when I could expect confirmation of same, whether or not she had abided by Rule 1.18 by not using or revealing my confidential information. Avoid her at all costs!