Stevens & Van Cott, PLLC

Mr. [redacted] represented the Petitioner in a divorce matter. Mr. [redacted] informed his client that he will be arguing for Respondent to pay his clients legal fees which created a false hope that any time he invested would be reimbursed to his client by the Respondent. Rather than settle the matter which included a predetermined mutual agreement between both parties as to custody, support, maintenance and division of their limited assets, Mr. [redacted] chose to lead the Petitioner to believe that she would not be equally liable for liabilities incurred during their marriage. Mr. [redacted] subsequently proceeded to invest hundreds of hours of time convincing the Petitioner to argue for issues which ultimately led to his legal fees far exceeding the very issues they were arguing over.
During the process Mr. [redacted] provided his client with inaccurate information regarding legal guidelines in a state which he is not licensed to practice law and furthermore advised his client on tax issues which he is not qualified to provide.
Mr. [redacted] has avoided making return phone calls to Respondent or responding to emails for weeks at a time while continuing to bill his client for time spent reading said emails.
Mr. [redacted] has also told numerous blatant lies to both parties regarding his inability to secure credit reports, provide documents promised, make follow up phone calls as promised, etc.
After investigating Mr. [redacted] background it was determined that the State Bar of Arizona has found him guilty of engaging in misconduct on at least two (2) occasions.
Both charges of misconduct against Mr. [redacted] include similar issues to those stated in this complaint which include;
Failed to diligently represent his clients
Failed to adequately communicate with his clients
Engaged in conduct prejudicial to the Administration of Justice
Failed to promptly respond to State Bar inquiries
In a similar dissolution-of-marriage case (Supreme Court No. [redacted]), The Arizona Supreme Court issued a judgment against Mr. [redacted] and ordered him to pay fines and restitution. Additionally he was censured by the Arizona State Bar Association and placed on probation for two (2) years. He was also required to obtain an approved practice monitor.
An additional complaint has been filed with the Arizona State Bar Association to review and address these very serious issues.
Please use caution and do your due diligence when considering Mr. [redacted] for any form of legal representation.

Mr. [redacted] represented the Petitioner in a divorce matter. Mr. [redacted] informed his client that he will be arguing for Respondent to pay his clients legal fees which created a false hope that any time he invested would be reimbursed to his client by the Respondent. Rather than settle the matter which included a predetermined mutual agreement between both parties as to custody, support, maintenance and division of their limited assets, Mr. [redacted] chose to lead the Petitioner to believe that she would not be equally liable for liabilities incurred during their marriage. Mr. [redacted] subsequently proceeded to invest hundreds of hours of time convincing the Petitioner to argue for issues which ultimately led to his legal fees far exceeding the very issues they were arguing over.
During the process Mr. [redacted] provided his client with inaccurate information regarding legal guidelines in a state which he is not licensed to practice law and furthermore advised his client on tax issues which he is not qualified to provide.
Mr. [redacted] has avoided making return phone calls to Respondent or responding to emails for weeks at a time while continuing to bill his client for time spent reading said emails.
Mr. [redacted] has also told numerous blatant lies to both parties regarding his inability to secure credit reports, provide documents promised, make follow up phone calls as promised, etc.
After investigating Mr. [redacted] background it was determined that the State Bar of Arizona has found him guilty of engaging in misconduct on at least two (2) occasions.
Both charges of misconduct against Mr. [redacted] include similar issues to those stated in this complaint which include;
Failed to diligently represent his clients
Failed to adequately communicate with his clients
Engaged in conduct prejudicial to the Administration of Justice
Failed to promptly respond to State Bar inquiries
In a similar dissolution-of-marriage case (Supreme Court No. [redacted]), The Arizona Supreme Court issued a judgment against Mr. [redacted] and ordered him to pay fines and restitution. Additionally he was censured by the Arizona State Bar Association and placed on probation for two (2) years. He was also required to obtain an approved practice monitor.
An additional complaint has been filed with the Arizona State Bar Association to review and address these very serious issues.
Please use caution and do your due diligence when considering Mr. [redacted] for any form of legal representation.