Brian J Waid

Brian J Waid

1.0
Rating: 8.2

Licensed for 50 years

Ethics and professional responsibility Lawyer at Seattle, WA
Practice Areas: Ethics & Professional Responsibility, Appeals

5400 California Ave SW, Ste. D, Seattle, WA

About Brian

Biography

Practice Areas

2

Practice Areas

Ethics and Professional Responsibility 75%

Legal malpractice and fee dispute litigation, primarily on behalf of clients against their former attorneys

52 years | 100 cases

75%
Appeals 25%

Successful practice in U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Courts of Appeal for Ninth, Fifth & Eighth Circuits; Washington Supreme Court, Louisiana Supreme Court and Nebraska Supreme Court, as well as state intermediate appellate courts

52 years | 100 cases

25%

Fees and Rates

Cost

Free Consultation

$0 first 60 minutes


Payment Methods

  • Cash
  • Check

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 Washington for 29 years

State: Washington

Acquired: 1996

Active

No misconduct found

Licensed in Alaska for 27 years

State: Alaska

Acquired: 1998

Inactive

No misconduct found

Licensed in Louisiana for 45 years

State: Louisiana

Acquired: 1980

Inactive

No misconduct found

Licensed in Nebraska for 50 years

State: Nebraska

Acquired: 1975

Inactive

No misconduct found

Location

Waid Law Office

5400 California Ave SW, Ste. D, Seattle, WA, 98136

Ad

Transform legal challenges into solutions.

Connect now to review your situation.

The Avvo Rating explained

display-bg

The Avvo Rating explained

Brian J Waid's Reviews

Avvo Review Score

1.0 /5.0

2 Client Reviews

5 star (0)
4 star (0)
3 star (0)
2 star (0)
1 star (2)

Posted by Victim | September 8, 2021 | Hired Attorney

This review is from a person who hired this attorney.

True Story, Bad Men, Caveat Emptor

I am an attorney (female). I hired Brian Waid to protect me and three of my clients (females) from fraud being perpetrated by my co-counsel. The situation was one that called for expertise which I myself lacked and Mr. Waid claimed to possess. Mr. Waid FALSELY advised me that in order to achieve my g...oals, it would be necessary to file a lawsuit against my co-counsel. In fact, I was the priority lienholder in my clients' case and this legal status gave me important rights, including the right to resolve my concerns in summary proceedings in my clients' case. Thus, the lawsuit Waid filed on my behalf was not necessary. Waid failed to EVER determine whether fraud was occurring (it was), and Waid used the unnecessary lawsuit as a way to gain control over my clients' money ($543,000). He did nothing to achieve my goals after filing the sham lawsuit, and after months of litigation with total fees billed of $78,350.85, he suddenly informed the trial court (w/o my consent) that the claims he filed were meritless to begin with. Thus, judgment was entered against me, and my clients suffered the very harm I hired Waid to prevent (which he could have prevented if he had enforced my lien rights). Waid's dismissal of my claims got me sued for $102,000, co-counsel used it as an excuse to go after our clients' money in the court registry. Then, Waid withdrew while this important motion was pending, leaving me without legal representation to defend, then filed a lien for attorney's fees, attaching my clients' half-million $$ that was in the court registry. Among other things, I filed a bar complaint against Waid for his deceit. Waid had a well-established record of engaging in similar deceptive practices with other female clients-victims. For example, he and his Maryland co-counsel filed a lawsuit on behalf of Angela Oppe. After billing and collecting huge sums from her (her retirement savings), they informed the trial court that the claims had been meritless all along and dismissed those claims without telling Angela. Then, they advised Angela that she should appeal and billed and collected some more $ for the meritless appeal. I learned about Angela and helped her secure ethical counsel. She recovered some (not all) of her money from the two scoundrels' insurance policies. But State Bar Officials did not investigate or take action against Waid in response to my bar complaint, despite the evidence they had of his serious ethical violations and trail of multiple victims. Upset by their failure to protect the public, I felt it was my duty to warn the public the only way I knew how (i.e., by posting a client review on this very website). Waid shamelessly sued me for defamation. The federal judge (Ricardo Martinez) decided I should be punished for the unpardonable offense of speaking out against Bar Officials (White Males) and a fellow attorney (a White Male). He ruled that three words I used to describe Waid (I won't repeat them here b/c I could be thrown in jail) were so offensive that those words constitute "defamation per se", regardless of what Waid did to deserve them. Judge Martinez wanted power over the outcome of the defamation case, but knew if he denied me the jury trial I demanded, he would be reversed. So, he simply ordered that I would not be permitted to call Key Witnesses at trial and could not present any documents to the jury. Thus, I could either go to a jury trial and be prohibited from presenting any evidence to jury, or let the judge do whatever he was doing to do to me. I gave up. Judge got to be the "jury". After hearing only one side's evidence (Waid's), he entered findings and conclusions to damage my reputation, omitting fact that he received no evidence from me, concluding all facts in Avvo post were false. Then, entered a $50,000 judgment against me. Judge abused his power for his friends at State Bar. Waid ruined my life, hurt my innocent clients. Judge Martinez rewarded Waid. True Story, Bad Men, Caveat Emptor.

Brian Waid

Replied last September 15, 2021

The following information is public record. No confidential or non-public information is disclosed. The reviewer is Sandra L. Ferguson, a disgraced lawyer previously disciplined by the Washington Supreme Court for dishonesty. See In re Discipline of Ferguson. None of what she says is true. She's been making these same allegations since 2012 and has been sanctioned by the federal court in Seattle and the Washington Supreme Court in connection with those claims. In 2018, the federal court in Seattle conducted a trial in which Ms. Ferguson's allegations were directly at issue. She had every opportunity to present whatever evidence she had. The Court concluded that each of Ms. Ferguson's allegations against me were not just false, but defamatory and made with actual malice. 2018 WL 604174 (W.D. Wash. 11/19/2018). The Court enjoined her from continuing to harass me with those same defamatory allegations. Ms. Ferguson of course appealed and the 9th Circuit affirmed the judgment against her. 798 Fed. Appx. 986 (2020). So caveat emptor beware indeed---stay as far away from Sandra L. Ferguson as possible.

Posted by Michael | July 16, 2018 | Hired Attorney

This review is from a person who hired this attorney.

Bumbling, incompetent, and poor representation.

Retained for Legal Mal; defense stip to breach of duty; counsel advised me two months in advance that defense Case-In-Chief was claiming I received no head injury; Waid needed only prove damages. Had four years of medical records, 3 ER diagnosis of TBI; 3 treating physicians diagnosis TBI; failed to ...introduce into evidence. I have had neck surgery, will need back surgery, and am still seeing a concussion care expert for Post Concussion Syndrome, and my medical issues are meticulously documented. Now I go the rest of my life disabled trying to raise a child on SSI, due to his incompetence. What is worse, he blamed ME for the less than cost jury verdict, saying "They didn't find you credible!" when he brought ZERO evidence to support my claim. He kept losing exhibits during trial; couldn't understand the judges rulings; was forgetting everything; failed to rebut any of the defense claims; refused to listen to me; then after losing, he claimed he introduced all the medical evidence. Defense counsel; the trial record; and, my recollection all agree this is a flat out LIE! He may have been good once, but senescence has put an end to any competence he may once have had.

See All Client Reviews

Brian J Waid's Lawyer Endorsements

Endorse Brian

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:  8.2 (Excellent)

Honors

2020

Preeminent 5.0 out of 5, Martindale-Hubbell

2020

Peer Review Rated, Martindale-Hubbell

2016

Top Lawyers in Washington, The Legal Network

2006

Rotarian of the Year, Rotary District 5030 (King County metro area)

1994

Rotarian of the Year, Rotary District 6840 (SE La. & So. Miss.)

Work Experience

2009 - Present

Principal, Waid Law Office, PLLC

2003 - 2009

Associate, Law Offices of Robert B. Gould

1998 - 2003

Associate, Bendich, Stobaugh & Strong

1996 - 1998

Contract Attorney, Law Offices of Robert B. Gould

1982 - 1998

Partner, Bubrig & Waid

Associations

1999 - Present

Alaska Bar Association

Member

1998 - Present

King County Bar Association

Member

1996 - Present

Washington State Bar Association

Member

1980 - Present

Louisiana State Bar Association

Member

American Bar Association

Member

Louisiana Bar Foundation,

Vice Chair

Sample of Legal Cases

Hoskin v. Plaquemines Parish Government

Plaintiff personal injury judgment

Miller v. Reighter

Court of Appeals reinstated class action.

Powers v. Chizek

Unemployed workerwon benefits

Metro. New Orleans of La. Consumers League v. City of New Orleans

Plaintiff class prevailed on appeal; case settled.

Foval v. First National Bank of Commerce

RICO Defendant defeated all claims.

Scandurro v. Thibaut

Settled.

Perez v. Shook

Remanded to State Court by Federal Court

Longman v. Allstate Ins. Co.

Judgment for Plaintiff Injury Victim.

Vela v. Plaquemines Parish Government

Affirmed Class Certification

Haworth v. L'Hoste

Defense verdict for defendant landowners

Higgins v. USAA Property & Casualty Ins. Co.

Judgment for injury victim, with penalties.

Shoemake v. Ferrer

Plaintiffs recovered for legal malpractice

Kirk v. Mt. Airy Insurance Co.

Plaintiff established insurance bad faith rules

Vizcaino v. U.S. District Court

U.S. Supreme Court denied review

Vizcaino v. U.S. District Court

9th Circuit issued writ of mandate.

Winbun v. Moore

Plaintiff won medical malpractice judgment.

Vizcaino v. Microsoft

Employee benefit class action

Metropolitan Water Dist. of So. Calif. v. Superior Court

Court adopted position of amici/employees

VersusLaw v. Stoel Rives, LLP

Plaintiff won appeal; settled on remand

Bertelsen v. Harris

Split 9th Circuit held in favor of the attorney.

Mut. of Enumclaw Ins. Co. v. Dan Paulson Constr.

Insurance Bad Faith Judgment for Homeowners

See More Legal Cases

Education

1975

University of Nebraska College of Law

JD - Juris Doctor

1972

University of Nebraska, Lincoln

BA - Bachelor of Arts

Speaking Engagements

2009

Intellectual Property Institute

Ethics for the Intellectual Property Attorney

2008

Litigation Basics

Ethics: Establishing and Maintaining the Attorney-Client Relationship

2008

Intellectual Property Seminar

Legal Ethics and Malpractice Issues for the Intellectual Property Attorney Wannabe

2000

Employment Law Seminar

Employee or Contractor?

2000

Employment Law Seminar

It's Not Just Microsoft!

1999

Rule 11: It's Use and Abuse, and Implications for Professionalism

Ethics and Professionalism

1998

Subrogation

Subrogation in Personal Injury Claims

1998

Subrogation

ERISA Subrogation

1998

Rule 11: It's Use and Abuse, and Implications for Professionalism

Ethics and Professionalism

Publications

1981

Loyola Law Review Ethical Problems of the Class Action Practitioner

Activity

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