Avvo: Lowest Possible Rating And ‘extreme Caution’
Legal online registry Avvo rated Randazza a 1 out of 10, along with the label “Extreme Caution.” This is the lowest possible rating for the website. Randazza has been embroiled in several scandals over the past ten years, starting with his career as a porn lawyer. While representing one porn producer, Randazza apparently violated the Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct by dealing with other producers. He also attempted to bribe someone, which he pleaded guilty to.
Many reviews were posted on Avvo raving about Randazza’s service, but someone left a review that said, “I highly, highly recommend Marc Randazza as a lawyer and a human being — although I strongly suggest that you avoid being on the other side of him, because he’ll eat you and your lawyer for breakfast and eat whatever’s left for a mid-day snack.” That review and others like it do not look like reviews left by real clients.
State Bar of Nevada: Suspension
These violations included:
- Conflict of Interest: Current Clients,
- Conflict of Interest: Current Clients: Specific Rules,
- Imputation of Conflicts of Interest,
- Safekeeping Property,
- Declining or Terminating Representation, Advisor,
- Restrictions on Right to Practice,
Update: Randazza was pled guilty to two charges, and when the State Bar of Nevada suspended his legal license for twelve months, Randazza tried to appeal to the Supreme Court of Nevada. He was rejected. But the State Bar of Nevada did not choose to enforce his suspension, raising questions as to the principles of the Bar.
It also seems that even the UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE has suspended Marc Randanzza.
“Marc J. Randazza (“Respondent”) is hereby suspended from the practice of trademark and other non-patent law before the United States Patent and Trademark Office”.
But he has also been disciplined in three other states: Massachusetts, Arizona, and California. Each time, the respective state bars have tried to strip his legal license, but to no avail.
Dwight Schar’s Attorney Randazza Accused of Racism
HuffPost writes that “outrageous” Randazza is “curiously chummy” with fascists and racists. Randazza has also represented several Neo-Nazis in court, including Andrew Anglin, who published the address of a Jewish realtor on the Nazi website The Daily Stormer. The same outlet also wrote that Randazza casually threw around racial slurs in his workplaces.
Coincidentally, a website smearing Don Juravin, who is currently in the middle of lawsuits with Dwight Schar and Bella Collina, came from the same web host that is home to The Daily Stormer. When Mr. Juravin tried to file a complaint with Bella Collina, his community owned by Schar, he was not taken seriously by the staff on Schar’s payroll.
Instead, he was sent text messages that mocked his English. A member of Bella Collina staff took his text, which complained of a “stocker,” and fired it back at him, instead of trying to understand his meaning. The ensuing conversation consisted of the staff member repeating “stocker” instead of stalker, as if to mock Juravin with it.
How Corrupted Randazza Represents Dwight Schar’s Reputation?
Corrupt Randazza, still representing Dwight Schar and Bella Collina, sent a letter mocking Don Juravin’s Jewish heritage. The letter cast doubt on his identity, saying that instead, because Mr. Juravin runs a religious website, he is not Jewish.
Dan Snyder and Attorney Joe Tacopina Accuse Marc Randazza
The owner of the Washington Football Team, Dan Snyder, and Joe Tacopina, his attorney, have also accused Randazza of being associated with the websites that supposedly published defamatory statements about Snyder. NBC Sports writes that Tacopina and his team pointed fingers at Randazza’s association with Ari Bass, who runs the websites that published stories about Snyder. Now that Randazza is representing Dwight Schar, it seems that both Schar and Randazza are linked as Don Juravin can probably testify to.
Some of these links below have been the source for this article and others are for you to read and decide. Marc Randazza never opposed them, responded to them or had the court take them down. Therefore they can be assumed to be valid. Read them all and decide for yourself.
As Randazza himself said: “Be very careful anytime you have somebody trying to stifle someone else’s free speech. When you hear speech that bothers you, you hear speech that repulses you, speech that disgust you, I I think your first instinct should be to protect that, and then fighting and then debate against it. But if your beliefs are so fragile that they can’t stand in opposition to something that you find abhorrent, then maybe you need to look at your own beliefs and modified them.”
Randazza will try to argue that he is not corrupt. By saying that Randazza is corrupt, no one is accusing him of a crime, necessarily. They are simply saying that he is a dishonest attorney with a very high number of bar complaints in every state that he practices law. Aside, this is the opinion of this writer and this article as well as probably many others in the legal community.
Disclaimer: This article is merely the opinion of the writer and not that of the publication or any other official authority. There are points to think about and you should be doing your homework based on any other facts you may choose including checking court records, other sites and interviewing Randazza himself for his comments.