Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...

GILL & GALLINGER UPDATE

By Greg L | 22 June 2006 | Blogs | 2 Comments

Previously Jaded JD and J Sarge examined what appeared to be professional misconduct on the part of Jad Sansour and Gill & Gallinger in a letter that they sent to BVBL threatening legal action on behalf of the campaign of Steve Chapman. Manassas Journal Messenger reporter Kafia Hosh asked Faisal Gill about some of these questions and wrote:

The letter raised questions about the validity of Chapman’s legal representation, Gill and Gallinger. For one, there was a misspelling in the letterhead. The letterhead used was a draft because the firm is going through a corporate reshuffle, according to Chapman’s spokesman Faisal Gill, a partner at Gill and Gallinger. “We were just going through a whole change,” he said. Gill also said an associate typed the letter.

Since then, Sapentia LLC has ceased advertising legal services. The previously unknown law firm of Gill & Gallinger has established bare-bones websites (here and here) but the New York office referenced in the letterhead of the initial threat has mysteriously disappeared. And no reference is made on these websites regarding who the attorneys are in this firm and where they are licensed to practice as the rules of professional conduct would seem to require.

The domain name “gillandgallinger.com” has not been registered.

The address listed in Irvine California for Gill & Gallinger appears to be that of Bimbo Bakeries USA. Not being familiar with the area, I don’t know if there are other establishments at that address.

The phone number listed for the St. Louis office matches the number for a company called “I Bridge Solutions” at the same address. The second floor of this building is that of a virtual office space provider called Unique Venues which would seem consistent with Gill & Gallinger’s choice of office space in Washington.

This law firm would probably be a lot more credible if it could write a letter or file a pleading that didn’t contain misspellings, instead of trying to establish “virtual offices” in locations where there is no evidence that they are licensed to practice law. Given the performance of this firm so far, as well as the performance of Faisal Gill as a campaign spokesman, it’s worth it for Steve Chapman to revisit the advice he may have received regarding the advisability of continuing this lawsuit.



The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.

2 Comments

  1. Anonymous said on 23 Jun 2006 at 3:43 pm:
    Flag comment

    BVBL (TNO), one of the most foolish things a person in your position could do is piss off an attorney by issuing half-baked facts, smug innuendo, and barely-veiled allegations of wrongdoing.

    Lawyers don’t need to hire a lawyer to go to court and make your life miserable - they can do it as a hobby. And if he/she/they choose to make you their whipping boy because of your allegations, it will cost you plenty.

    But hey! You’re a moth and there’s the candle! Fly around it! Into it! Get close, real close! ;-)

  2. NoVA Scout said on 24 Jun 2006 at 12:10 am:
    Flag comment

    Greg: at the risk of seeming to flatter unduly, the circumstances of the letterhead appearing (with signs of great haste in its construction) in the context of the suit against BVBL might lead some to conclude that the law firm was cobbled together out of bits and bobs of Sapentia for the sole purpose of bringing the suit. It is strange indeed to see a multi-city firm spring up so quickly, especially when it is so difficult to trace the bar memberships and composition of the enterprise. With the lawyer who signed off on the complaint having just been admitted to the bar, and the jurisdictions of the name partners’ admissions very obscure from the letterhead of the desist letter, one wonders whether BVBL may have spawned the hurried creation of the firm just for the Chapman suit. One could wonder how many other actions are being maintained in the name of this firm. My hunch would be rather few.

    I guess one has to start someplace. I started a law firm once and it didn’t do much at all for the first few months of its existence other than to give me a place to go during the day.

    Good luck. Being enmeshed in litigation is no fun, even when one feels righteous about one’s position.

Comments are closed.


Views: 3406