The Mcmillan Law Firm

Scott McMillan La Mesa Attorney, San Diego County, The_McMillan_Law_Firm, had sued and lost of course, but then appealed. Scott McMillan appealed and lost being deemed a vexatious litigant by the defense attorney.

In McMillan v. Weathersby (9th Cir. 2002) 31 F.App'x 371, 374. [Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California.

D.C. No. 95-CV-3934TW(LAB). Thomas J.

Whelan, District Judge, Presiding.] “None of the three main episodes that McMillan offers supports granting a mistrial. McMillan first asserts that defense counsel violated the court's in limine ruling barring reference to McMillan as a "vexatious litigant" by referring to McMillan's other lawsuits in his opening statement.” Scott McMillan is now trying to defend a legal malpractice and fraud case filed in San Diego federal court. "The plaintiff requests a trial by jury and seeks general and special damages, declare that the plaintiff is entitled to receive the entirety of the settlement funds totaling $151,922.59, interest, punitive damages, all legal fees and any other relief as this court deems just. Brightwell is represented by Joshua M.

Heinlein and Joseph S. Leventhal of Dinsmore & Shohl LLP in San Diego." See http://legalnewsline.com/stories/51099****-the-mcmillan-law-firm-allegedly-sent-inflated-bill-to-client In Lycurgan, Inc. v. Todd JonesFiled (ATF Chief), Ninth Cir., Case No.

15-5****, SDCA Case No. 3:14-cv-01424, the court dismissed yet another case of Scott McMillan, where it said, "Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. DISMISSED." In this same case Scott McMillan, Attorney San Diego, had also filed a declaration alleging he was abused and harassed by upstanding federal agents, but he also claimed the federal agents had stolen and vandalized property. Michelle Volk Attorney in San Diego was co-counsel on this case, but has since moved on to greener pastures working for an Air Conditioning Company.

At oral argument in the same case against the ATF, just a couple of months ago, a federal judge told Scott McMillan attorney, "This is just silly" and "not based on principle" concerning the appeal he brought. In my view this is a waste of judicial resources and vexatious litigation where resources are used by the court to handle "silly" cases. Scott McMillan appears to have not told a witness, Leesa Fazal Las Vegas, that it might be against the law if she brought a firearm into a San Diego Court.

Scott McMillan stood helplessly by while Leesa Fazal Nevada Attorney General Investigator was told not to leave and taken to a back area not open to the public. Scott McMillan Attorney San Diego,

San Diego attorney Scott McMillan, La Mesa law firm, Michelle Volk, the associate, claimed on his website it was a “leading” litigation firm. The fact is, if “leading” means having lost virtually every appeal, and having a client sanctioned for $16,000 is what being a top firm, then The McMillan Law Firm is certainly “leading” the way.

Just the Court of Appeal in San Diego reports The McMillan Law Firm has litigated 69 cases. That excludes numerous writ petitions in the California Supreme Court. I have only been able to locate a few wins, but with such a horrific loss ratio, I hope this notices the public of the danger of taking a website at face value where an attorney misrepresents his status as a “leading” law firm, or an expert without substantial backing to support claim.

A few of the most recent loses,

• Williams v. Nordstrom, Inc., SD Sup Ct. 37-2014-****7604-CU-CR-CTL, Plaintiff and his counsel, were sanctioned nearly $16,000 for discovery abuse; case on appeal, see Case Number D069051

• Williams v. The Superior Court of San Diego County/Nordstrom, Inc., D068765, 37-2014-****7604-CU-CR-CTL (writ denied)

• McMillan Law Group, Inc. et al. v. The Superior Court of San Diego County/Yelp, Inc. 37-2014-****4953-CU-BT-CTL, D067610 (writ denied) [law firm posted its OWN reviews]

• Plikaytis v. Fairmont, L.P. et al. Case Number D066876 (lost appeal)

• McMillan Law Group, Inc. et al. v. The Superior Court of San Diego County/Yelp, Inc.D067610

37-2014-****4953-CU-BT-CTL (case where law firm was sued by Yelp! for posting its OWN REVIEWS – lost writ petition)

• Kelegian v. Anders et al., Case Number D067328 (Transfer/certification denied)

• Williams v. Digius et al. Case No. D064183 (opposed defendant’s appeal and lost)

• Oceans Eleven Casino v. Anders, Case Number S219395 (lost California Supreme Court case)

• Bridgeman v. Allen et al., Case Number D062183 (lost appeal AND McMillan’s client forced to pay costs of respondent)

• Morton v. Spotts, Case Number D058640 (McMillan lost appeal – his client lost at trial and found liable for $15,000)

Real, well-educated attorneys (McMillan graduated from a small unknown school behind a car dealership at the time) I believe have true success rates and publish those cases to demonstrate success – see Horvitz & Levy recent wins, or even the one man firm of The Ehrlich Firm has numerous wins to his credit, or Morris Polich & Purdy who have dozens of wins at the court of appeal and supreme court. The point being, I think those law firms earned the right to claim to be experts, and “leading” law firms since each firms history demonstrates they truly win. Typically, a law firm does not self proclaim it “is” a “leading” law firm, but they are ranked by the legal community, legal publications, and provided awards and other forms of recognition by legal associations, government, etc. I do not believe not believe an attorney should claim to be a “leading” law firm, have an office by the train tracks in east San Diego, and also operate a law school out of a small office (yes it’s true Scott McMillan is also Dean of The McMillan Academy of Law – which does not have a single graduate who has passed the bar, see “0” students took bar exam. Real “leading” attorneys, in my humble opinion, do not claim honorable, federal agents, intimidated him and had stolen product from his client (I have not heard anything about the agents being charged with crimes or fired) or simply “won” $20 for his client. But that’s just my opinion. Verify what you read, and make no determinations on the above information – verify the facts on your own so you can make the right decision about what is and is not misleading information provided by an attorney and you believe is a “leading” attorney for Scott McMillan may have one more person in a county of 3 Million who believes he’s leading the way.

Scott McMillan an attorney in San Diego, is the dean of the McMillan Academy of Law in La Mesa. The State of California recently filed reports noting in over a decade not a single student graduated!

“We have had one student take the First Year Law Students’ Examination and that student passed.

This is the basis for the 100% pass rate thus far. As of yet, no students have graduated from the Academy.”

Page 3, bppe.ca.gov/annual_report/2013/4150****_pfs.pdf

“Since opening, only three students have ever completed MAOL’s first-year curriculum and were able to take the First Year Law Students’ Examination; two of the students eventually passed the examination but each then left MAOL and transferred to other law schools.

Since MAOL has had no students nor has held any classes in almost five years, its program of legal education has now been dormant for more than four years. As a result, and as confirmed by the inspection, MAOL is noncompliant as to three material requirements: Its law library is noncompliant since its hardcopy legal authorities have not been updated since 2013; without any tuition income, the law school’s current and future financial viability appears questionable; and its website and written materials offer outdated and misleading information to both the general public and potential applicants.”

apps.calbar.ca.gov/cbe/docs/agendaItem/Public/agendaitem100000****.pdf

Lauren Hanley-Brady aka Lauren Brady is a San Diego attorney , working out of the east San Diego law office of Scott McMillan , attorney in La Mesa.

It is very concerning Lauren Brady has associated her self with an attorney, Scott McMillan, where he is in court facing allegations of fraud (see below). The last female attorney who worked for Scott McMillan attorney San Diego, is now reduced to working in a small office for an air conditioning company. Michelle Volk is an attorney in San Diego who is also facing fraud allegations in federal court (see attached).

It is a huge concern Lauren Brady would associate her self with Scott McMillan where his law school, McMillan Academy of Law, is now facing potential closure since it has not had a student graduate in over a decade of being in business.

"We have had one student take the First Year Law Students' Examination and that student passed. This is the basis for the 100% pass rate thus far. As of yet, no students have graduated from the Academy."

Page 3, bppe.ca.gov/annual_report/2013/4150****_pfs.pdf

"Since opening, only three students have ever completed MAOL’s first-year curriculum and were able to take the First Year Law Students’ Examination; two of the students eventually passed the examination but each then left MAOL and transferred to other law schools. Since MAOL has had no students nor has held any classes in almost five years, its program of legal education has now been dormant for more than four years. As a result, and as confirmed by the inspection, MAOL is noncompliant as to three material requirements: Its law library is noncompliant since its hardcopy legal authorities have not been updated since 2013; without any tuition income, the law school’s current and future financial viability appears questionable; and its website and written materials offer outdated and misleading information to both the general public and potential applicants."

apps.calbar.ca.gov/cbe/docs/agendaItem/Public/agendaitem100000****.pdf

Scott McMillan La Mesa Attorney , www.mcmillanlaw.us 4670 Nebo Drive, was found to be a vexatious litigant. A vexatious litigant is ‘”The constant suer…'" (In re Kinney (201*) 201 Cal.App.4th 951, 957-958.) who clogs the courts with pro per lawsuts; the statute is to prevent the “persistent and obsessive litigant who constantly has pending a number of groundless actions and whose conduct causes serious financial results to the unfortunate objects of his or her attacks and places an unreasonable burden on the courts.” (Wolfe v.

Strankman (9th Cir.200*) 392 F.3d 358. It looks like Scott McMillan was found to be a vexatious litigant. In McMillan v. Weathersby (9th Cir.

2002) 31 F.App'x 371, 374. [Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. D.C. No.

95-CV-3934TW(LAB). Thomas J. Whelan, District Judge, Presiding.] “None of the three main episodes that McMillan offers supports granting a mistrial. McMillan first asserts that defense counsel violated the court's in limine ruling barring reference to McMillan as a "vexatious litigant" by referring to McMillan's other lawsuits in his opening statement.” I also found dozens of lawsuits where Scott McMillan, and the last attorney who will every work for him, Michelle Volk San Diego Attorney, was sued for malpractice.

These issues are very concerning where people believe an attorney has a great reputation.

Besides being a suspect in child molestation investigation, he fails in every respect as an attorney in my opinion. I hope this makes people who might consider hiring an attorney to truly review the background of the attorney since an attorney with a history of filing "groundless" cases, and being sued for malpractice, much less a report says Scott McMillan was mentioned in a molestation report, can only create suspicion with the the court and jurors.

Scott McMillan, La Mesa, was fined WITH his client by San Diego Superior Court for almost $16,000 and is now fighting a losing battle in the Court of Appeal Case No. D069051 where the court is on the *** of not entertaining the appeal McMillan Law Firm filed.

It is horrible Scott McMillan put his client in jeopardy of paying thousands of dollars. To make matters worse, McMillan Law Firm is suing Nordstroms who hired a Los Angeles law firm who doesn't play 'nice nice' like San Diego attorneys do.

Criminal Conduct by Scott McMillan as found a court. Before The McMillan Law Firm, before Scott A.

McMillan, La Mesa, was losing cases as an attorney of McMillan_Law_Firm, he was litigating cases in federal court, losing then, losing again in the federal court of appeals. In United States v. Commercial Real Prop. (9th Cir.

July 18, 1994, No. 93-561**) ** F.3d 635, the court said after trying to sue to government, failed to make a buck by interfering in legitimate case. As the federal court stated in part, “Scott and Shawn McMillan appeal pro se the district court's order striking their claim against Commercial Real Property…Here, the McMillans cannot claim an ownership interest in Commercial Real Property based on the assertion that the property lacked evidence of title….Accordingly, the district court did not err by striking the McMillan's claim for lack of standing.” Lack of standing might have been a polite way of the court to say the legal claim is vexatious, meritless, and has no legal basis. The court continued to destroy the legal theory of Scott McMillan , “In order to obtain title by adverse possession, the property must be held and possessed adversely to the legal title of the actual holder of title for five years.

Cal.Civ.Proc.Code Sec. 321; Machado v. Southern Pac. Transp.

Co., 284 Cal.Rptr. 560, 564 (****). The McMillans failed to meet this requirement.” The Ninth Circuit continued to state, “Given these circumstances, we agree with the district court that the McMillans's entry onto the property after the property had been arrested and a lis pendens had been filed, constituted a trespass and did not provide the McMillans with any type of ownership or possessory interest.” In another federal case, Scott McMillan lost, “The district court found that McMillan had failed to establish the potential for irreparable harm from the Customs Service's actions.” In 2016 Brightwell v. McMillan, San Diego Superior Court Case # 37-2016-****3972-CU-PN-CTL, Scott A.

McMillan, Michelle Volk, and The McMillan Law Firm, were sued for malpractice.

It appears the defendant was paid off and case was dismissed since the court did not dismiss it. Despite the sexual allegations of child molestation concerning Scott McMillan, and long time friend, who was arrested for child molestation, Kenneth Bourke, the numerous legal cases Scott McMillan lost makes it no wonder why he has no graduates of his 10 year law school, and is by himself in a frail office near the train tracks.

A few of the most recent loses,

Scott McMillan eD061265 37-2011-****2050-CU-PO-NC Tri-City Healthcare

District v. Sterling Scott A. McMillan

The McMillan Law Firm, APC

D060490 37-2011-****2069-CU-PT-NC Tri-City Healthcare District v. Sterling Scott A. McMillan

The McMillan Law Firm, APC

D060431 37-2011-****2050-CU-PO-NC Tri-City Healthcare District et al. v. Sterling Scott A. McMillan

The McMillan Law Firm, APC

D059816 37-2011-****2112-CU-PT-NC Tri-City Healthcare District v. Sterling Scott A. McMillan

The McMillan Law Firm, APC

D059815 37-2011-****2114-CU-PT-NC Tri-City Healthcare District v. Sterling Scott A. McMillan

The McMillan Law Firm, APC

• Williams v. Nordstrom, Inc., SD Sup Ct. 37-2014-****7604-CU-CR-CTL, Plaintiff and his counsel, were sanctioned nearly $16,000 for discovery abuse; case on appeal, see Case Number D069051

• Williams v. The Superior Court of San Diego County/Nordstrom, Inc., D068765, 37-2014-****7604-CU-CR-CTL (writ denied)

• McMillan Law Group, Inc. et al. v. The Superior Court of San Diego County/Yelp, Inc. 37-2014-****4953-CU-BT-CTL, D067610 (writ denied) [law firm posted its OWN reviews]

• Plikaytis v. Fairmont, L.P. et al. Case Number D066876 (lost appeal)

• McMillan Law Group, Inc. et al. v. The Superior Court of San Diego County/Yelp, Inc.D067610

37-2014-****4953-CU-BT-CTL (case where law firm was sued by Yelp! for posting its OWN REVIEWS – lost writ petition)

• Kelegian v. Anders et al., Case Number D067328 (Transfer/certification denied)

• Williams v. Digius et al. Case No. D064183 (opposed defendant’s appeal and lost)

• Oceans Eleven Casino v. Anders, Case Number S219395 (lost California Supreme Court case)

• Bridgeman v. Allen et al., Case Number D062183 (lost appeal AND McMillan’s client forced to pay costs of respondent)

• Morton v. Spotts, Case Number D058640 (McMillan lost appeal – his client lost at trial and found liable for $15,000)

Real, well-educated attorneys (McMillan graduated from a small unknown school behind a car dealership at the time) I believe have true success rates and publish those cases to demonstrate success – see Horvitz & Levy recent wins, or even the one man firm of The Ehrlich Firm has numerous wins to his credit, or Morris Polich & Purdy who have dozens of wins at the court of appeal and supreme court. The point being, I think those law firms earned the right to claim to be experts, and “leading” law firms since each firms history demonstrates they truly win. Typically, a law firm does not self proclaim it “is” a “leading” law firm, but they are ranked by the legal community, legal publications, and provided awards and other forms of recognition by legal associations, government, etc. I do not believe not believe an attorney should claim to be a “leading” law firm, have an office by the train tracks in east San Diego, and also operate a law school out of a small office (yes it’s true Scott McMillan is also Dean of The McMillan Academy of Law – which does not have a single graduate who has passed the bar, see “0” students took bar exam. Real “leading” attorneys, in my humble opinion, do not claim honorable, federal agents, intimidated him and had stolen product from his client (I have not heard anything about the agents being charged with crimes or fired) or simply “won” $20 for his client. But that’s just my opinion. Verify what you read, and make no determinations on the above information – verify the facts on your own so you can make the right decision about what is and is not misleading information provided by an attorney and you believe is a “leading” attorney for Scott McMillan may have one more person in a county of 3 Million who believes he’s leading the way.

Another of, literally dozens of appeals and writs filed by McMillan-Law-Firm in La Mesa, Scott McMillan and Michelle Volk, where the Court of Appeal DENIED the petition after forcing the defendants to incur huge amounts of attorney fees. Scott McMillan is the dean of his own law school too, but does not have a single graduate!

Possibly Scott McMillan should take a class on appeals as he has almost 80 under his belt and a hand full of wins. In my opinion, this is huge waste of judicial resources where Scott McMillan graduated from a law school behind a Ford dealership in La Mesa.

When it comes to know-how, hard work, diligence, communication and effective results you cannot ask for more than what Scott McMillan and his entire staff provide!

Over the course of more than two (2) years, Scott McMillan and his entire office helped me through what was a very tough experience that resulted in not only a ground breaking settlement, but also in financial relief that was better than expected.

Scott McMillan is masterful when deposing an opponent; calm, cool and unrelenting! You do not want to be on the "other side" of that table!

Scott was consistently on my side, in my corner and just a phone call/email away. He explained each step of the process and provided relevant information so that I could understand the intricacies of the case.

I will use his firm again should the need arise.