|Associate||Davies Pearson, P.C.||2007 - Present|
|Associate||Dickson Steinacker, LLP||2006 - 2007|
|Associate||Luce & Associates, P.S.||2002 - 2006|
|Associate||Comfort Davies & Smith, P.S.||2001 - 2002|
|Association name||Position name||Duration|
|Commercial Law League of America||Member||2010 - Present|
|Pierce County Humane Society||Board Member - President of Board of Directors||2009 - Present|
|Tacoma Pierce County Bar Association||Member||2001 - Present|
|Washington State Bar Association||Member||2001 - Present|
|Association of General Contracts of Washington||Member||N/A|
|Seattle University School of Law||Law||JD - Juris Doctor||2000|
|University of Puget Sound||N/A||BA - Bachelor of Arts||1997|
Posted by Diane b
Chris is not only a very good attorney, he is also compassionate and caring. In my particular case, he reviewed all materials that were of value and did excellent outlining the facts in a clear and precise manner. Not only would I recommend him to others, I would hire him again if a situation arose where I needed help.
Posted by Kathy
Was always professional and a pleasure to work with. He also demonstrated a vast knowledge of the law. The outcome was in the company's favor.
Posted by anonymous
We hired Christopher J. Marston to advise and represent us after we discovered several construction defects and contract violations by our general contractor.
As it turned out, I couldn’t have chosen a worse attorney than Mr. Marston. Mr. Marston claimed to have experience and success with defending clients like us and convinced us that we had a good case against our contractor. Unfortunately, we discovered too late that Mr. Marston was not competent to advise or to represent us with our claims against our contractor.
Here is a brief summary of Mr. Marston’s performance:
*Failed to ask relevant and pertinent questions of the defendant while deposing him and his expert witnesses and to use the collected deposition information effectively during the arbitration hearing. If used, the defendant and his expert witness’ deposition answers would have clearly proved that the defendant had lied under oath. He also failed to effectively use the supporting exhibits and expert witnesses’ testimonies to challenge or discredit the defendant’s false statements.
*Flustered and confused during the arbitration hearing, Mr. Marston shuffled through his scribbled notes and four-inch thick exhibits trying to find what he needed next. On occasion, he would mistakenly refer to the defendant by my last name or forget where the exhibits were located in the binder. The arbitrator’s report shows that she never saw or heard our most incriminating, convincing exhibits and expert witnesses’ testimonies that would have easily exposed and discredited the defendant and his expert witnesses’ false statements.
*During our final meeting, Mr. Marston ignored our request for an explanation of why he felt he did a good job of presenting our case when the arbitrator’s written report clearly stated otherwise. The arbitrator’s written decision indicated that she found the defendant and his attorney’s well-prepared and articulated defense to be more creditable than Mr. Marston’s. He concluded by saying that we should take some solace in knowing that the defendant did not get away completely because he had to pay his legal fees too. Mr. Marston took no responsibility for his poor preparation, performance, and advice. He appeared more concerned with being paid for his services than his losing our law suit.
*By hiring and following Mr. Marston’s advice, we lost over $170K that includes legal fees and repair costs for the construction defects.