Attorney Craig W Young (Bar 124566) Misconduct Florida Bar Complaint

Sep 17, 2019 filled by Don Juravin

BACKGROUND of LIES

  1. Attorney Craig W Young answered my ad for a full time business and bankruptcy attorney. He stated that he had 6+ years of litigation experience  “including complex commercial litigation.” This was represented to me to mean that he had been handling litigation of complex business matters for 30 to 50 hrs a week for the last 6 years. 
  2. During our conversation, Attorney Young presented himself as even more capable and experienced than his portrayal online. His site depicted 2 offices in high-rise buildings and a picture with a team of five attorneys collaborating. 
  3. We had a lengthy conversation and based on that conversation, his site claims and his resume, I hired him. I provided him with a credit card and, as far as I was concerned, I became his client. We agreed on $75,000 a year based on 200 hours a month (work will be paid based $31.25 an hour). Attorney Young was asked to the incumbent in-house attorney to coordinate daily routines and learn about working with me.
  4. One can imagine that on the phone Attorney Young was more bragging and misleading than what he has placed “in writing” on his website. He told me about his vast experience in court litigation, jury trials, international tax, defamation trials, bankruptcy, etc. Based on that I came to the above arrangement.
  5. I elaborated about the cases, particularly on the Bella Collina case which we discussed at length. Attorney Young asked questions, I answered openly and we discussed strategy. 
  6. I  didn’t hear from Attorney Young after this.  He disappeared. I was concerned about the details of my credit card he was holding. Unprofessionally, I received  no correspondence from attorney Young. Therefore the feeling of him unprofessionally disappearing is warranted. Moreover, the feeling of an attorney that can’t handle the matter properly contributed to the feeling that “this attorney can not handle more complex issues” and hence my honest review online.
  7. I wrote my review online reflecting my experience with attorney’s Craig W. Young’s unprofessional, unethical and  Scam like (“Scam”) behaviour hoping to let others learn from my experience.
  8. It should be noted that at the time, I could not find any information/review about CWY Legal or Attorney Young that could have saved my time and this aggravation. I saw it as my duty to the public to report the honest experience, as I have done my entire life.
  9. My initial review was honest, truthful, based on my experience and opinion.
  10. I changed the review a few hours later to: “I have vast experience and I interviewed Attorney Craig W  Young. Great disappointment. I don’t feel that he has the experience he makes people believe”.  
  11. Later on, I inserted: “By now, I have more experience with him and I can tell you that he is deceitful and not so experienced. I think he may be unethical as well as I’m checking the matter.”

ATTORNEY CRAIG W YOUNG DECEIVED and SCAMMED ME

During our lengthy discussion which ended with attorney Young taking my credit card info over the phone, I had discussed the legal issues with Bella Collina, BK, FTC, my lifelong devotion to servicing the public and my invention that saved thousands from surgery.

Apparently, after my review off him, attorney Craig Young unethically made contact with Randall F. Greene (a stalker from Bella Collina owned by Dwight Schar) and he shared privileged information with him about my legal strategy and other info. 

Dishonest unethical behavior: the following online exhibit proves attorney Young acknowledged the compliment of Randall Greene as a customer while dismissing a negative review from another customer as “not a customer which didn’t contact this firm”.

CWYlegal.com IS FALSE ADVERTISING, VIOLATION OF BAR RULES – NOT OBJECTIVELY VERIFIABLE

FACTS

  1. Attorney Young is a single practitioner and has no employees.
  2. Attorney Young works from his old 760 sf 1 br 1 br apartment.
  3. Attorney Young has no real corporate office (seperate from his bedroom). 
  4. Attorney Young doesn’t have any office in a highrise building. 
  5. His company is brand new, only 1 year, at the time of creating the site.
  6. Attorney Craig W Young is a failure in corporate or professional terms based on his 6 years as an attorney. He lacks profitable specialty and the amount of true billable hours at a standard rate. 
  7. After 6 years, attorney Young is still heavily spending time chasing customers, offering “packages” and spending time networking. 
  8. He had been admitted to the FL Bar only two years earlier to writing the site.
  9. Attorney Young is depicting an absolutely false sense of corporate success and position in the legal sector which can be described as a scam (trying to get more money from a customer with lies).
  10. Attorney Young wrote the content of the website himself and there is no “we”
  11. Attorney Young is mainly familiar with simple tax issues and all other “specialties” described on his site are issues he handled maybe once and probably as an assignment when he was employed. It seems to me that no one really hired him for any of these specialties on a repeated basis.

ATTORNEY CRAIG W YOUNG’S SITE POTENTIALLY SCAM 

  1. Site language:
  1. False presentation: Attorney Young creates intentional false impression (deception or scam) in the eyes and minds  of the customers. He has employed third party language on the website trying to imitate and falsify a notion of big firm offices. This is blatantly deceitful to think that this is the finding or fact given by a third party.  Attorney Young has written it himself.
  2. Facts: Attorney Young is responsible for all the false information.  
  3. Violation: This is a violation of Rule 4.7-13 and 4.7-14 of the RRFB.
  4. Fake offices:
  1. False presentation: The phrase “The Premier Corporate & Litigation Law Firm” has been used on the website.  It may be mentioned here that the word “premier” means “best or most important.” Further, the word “firm” indicates “a company offering a professional service, for example a company of lawyers”. The phrase “The Premier Corporate & Litigation Law Firm” tends to show that: first, Attorney Young’s so-called law firm is one of the leading in the town (which it is not); second, that it is a law firm. 
  2. Facts:   Attorney Young is working alone in this firm and there are no other lawyers. Attorney Young’s law firm is not known for anything and is far from being “premier” which can be deceitful and scam since it has no factual basis.
  3. Facts: Attorney Young is the sole lawyer in the law firm, which, as per the description given at the website, is misleading. 
  4. Violation:  This is a violation of Rule 4.7-13 and 4.7-14 of the RRFB.
  1. False representation of legal team and office in a high rise building:
  1. False presentation:  Website presents a picture of five professionals who seem to be five attorneys collaborating. This is misrepresentation and deceiving.  First, it is deceitful to say that the office is located in a high rise building as the actual address given at the bottom of the website is different.  Attorney Young has scammed and defrauded the viewers with further deceitful use of the words “Our” so customers are likely be led to believe that Attorney Young is not working alone but with a team of lawyers.  No other person is working with Attorney Young.  
  2. Facts:  One attorney available for a part/full-time job without even a secretary. There is no firm of lawyers or five professionals or attorneys in this firm. The play on me and my firm may be legally correct, however, it is deceptive from the consumer perspective. Attorney Young is almost scamming the reader by creating a false presentation in order to receive more money based on this false presentation intended to conceal the fact that CWY Legal is only one year old and has no employees or any real success in the fields Attorney Young pretends to have a specialty in.
  3. Violation:  This is a violation of Rule 4.7-13 and 4.7-14 of the RRFB.
  1. Experience:
    1. False presentation:  Vast experience and such areas of specialities have been listed that seems possible only by a large group of attorneys and not by a single attorney who just got his Florida Bar license in 2016 .  Such a presentation can possibly lead a person to believe that CWY Legal is a big law firm with a number of lawyers who have real expertise (not just expertise on paper) in their respective fields. 
    2. Facts:  On the contrary, CWY Legal & Consultancy initiated its operations only in 2017.  Hence, the fields that it claims to have expertise in can, under no circumstances, be correct.  Further, Attorney Young got admitted in 2016. Hence, Attorney Young cannot have the expertise he has listed on the website.
    3. Violation:  This is a violation of Rule 4.7-13 and 4.7-14 of RRFB.
  1. Attorney Craig W Young is misleading about his “success”:
  1. False presentation:  Attorney Young has, in absolute bad faith, designed the website of CWY Legal so as to make a person believe that CWY Legal is a big law firm with a number of experienced lawyers with special expertise.  However, CWY Legal is only Attorney Young. He is not as much experienced in the fields as he has portrayed himself.  
  2. Facts:  Attorney Young is not that much qualified and/or experienced as he claims himself to be.  Attorney Young answers to an advertisement for a full time job, which means that he does not have so many billable hours a month and, therefore, he does not have all the experience he has claimed to have. After discovery and depositions, we will know how many billable hours Attorney Young has since 2016-2017 to  verify / substantiate his claimed “experiences” / “expertise”.
  3. Violation:  This is a violation of Rules 4.7-13 and 4.7-14 of the RRFB. 
  1. Mr. Young’s hourly rate scam, probability of success deception, fees scam:
  1. False presentation:  Attorney Young allures clients on a deceiving basis.  Attorney Young sets a high hourly rate higher than his real worth.  Attorney Young’s real experience, maybe not even expertise, appears to be in some small tax claims.  It is clear that Attorney Young is not an expert in “Corporate Litigation, Corporate Transactional, Debt Negotiation, Employment Disputes, Franchise Law, In-House Services, Real Estate Disputes, Tax Strategies, and Tax Debt Negotiation” as has been written on the website.
  2. Facts:  This is a scam because Attorney Young does not seem to have the experience he claims. He is charging exorbitantly more than  what he actually deserves. Also, the chances of Attorney Young to succeed are slimmer than an attorney with the true experience as he claims to have.
  3. Violation:  Attorney Young claims to be an expert in a number of law fields.  However, Attorney Young is working alone and his claim does not correlate with his experience and the time he has spent in this field.  Thus, a complete violation of Rule 4.7-13 and 4.7-14 of the RRFB.

Florida Bar Violations

  1. Rule 4-7.13(a)(1) provides that an advertisement is deceptive or inherently misleading if it contains a material statement that is factually or legally inaccurate. The website of Attorney Young states him to be the Principal Attorney which unequivocally indicates that he has other attorneys as well.  However, Attorney Young is the only practitioner there. This is in direct contravention to Rule 4-7.13(a)(1).
  1. Rule 4-7.13(a)(2) provides that omission of information which is necessary to prevent the information supplied from being misleading also falls within the deceptive and inherently misleading advertisements.  In the present matter, Attorney Young has made the viewers think that there is a team of lawyers. However, Attorney Young is the sole practitioner. As per the provisions of Rule 4-7.13(a)(2), it was mandatory upon Attorney Young to state in clear words that he is the sole practitioner and there is no other lawyer, which, clearly, has not been done.  
  1. Rule 4-7.13(a)(3) provides that any information / material on the advertisement which may have the effect of giving an implied existence of a nonexistent fact is also prohibited.  In this regard, it is to be categorically noted here that the website of Attorney Young depicts various such nonexistent implied facts:
  1. Home page of the website shows a number of buildings which implies that Attorney Young’s office is situated in either of these buildings. This is not true as the address given at the bottom of the website is somewhere else.  
  2. There is a picture of lawyers provided on the main page of the Website which show that there is a team.  However, the fact is that Attorney Young is working alone. Thus, this is in clear violation of Rule 4-7.13(a)(3).
  1. The violations committed by Attorney Young are so gross, flagrant and fundamental that even if any kind of disclosure was provided by Attorney Young, he should still be held accountable for the violations under the RRFB.
  1. Without prejudice to the particular violations mentioned above, Attorney Young has committed violations of the following provisions of RRFB as well:
  1. 4-7.13 – Deceptive and Inherently Misleading Advertisements;
  2. 4-7.14 (a) – Potentially Misleading Advertisements; and
  3. 4-7.15 – Unduly Manipulative or Intrusive Advertisements.
  1. As per Rule 4-7.13(a)(1) provides that an “advertisement is deceptive or inherently misleading if it contains a material statement that is factually or legally inaccurate”.  
  1. In this regard, it is to be noted that the website of Attorney Young states him to be the Principal Attorney which indicates that he has other attorneys as well.  However, Attorney Young is the only practitioner here. This is in direct contravention to Rule 4-7.13(a)(1). 
  1. Rule 4-7.13(a)(2) provides that omission of information which is necessary to prevent the information supplied from being misleading also falls within the deceptive and inherently misleading advertisements.  In the present matter, at first blush, on Attorney’s Young website, an attempt has been made to make the viewers think that there is a team. However, Attorney Young is a sole practitioner. Hence, as per the provisions of Rule 4-7.13(a)(2), it was necessary upon Attorney Young to state in clear words that he is the sole practitioner and there is no other lawyer, which, clearly, has not been done.  
  2. Rule 4-7.13(a)(3) provides that any information / material on the advertisement which may have the effect of giving an implied existence of a nonexistent fact is also prohibited.  In this regard, it is to be categorically noted here that the website of Attorney Young depicts various such nonexistent implied facts:
  1. First, the main page / home page of the website is showing a number of buildings which implies that Attorney Young’s office is situated in either of these buildings.  Nevertheless, at the bottom of the website, actual address of the office has been provided (i.e. (i) 630 S. Sapodilla Ave., Unit 529, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 and (ii) 2500 Quantum Lakes Dr., Suite 100, Boynton Beach, FL 33426).  Quick search of these addresses through the internet show that they are nowhere near those grand buildings as shown on the website.
  2. Second, there is a picture of lawyers provided on the main page of the website which indicates that Attorney Young is not working alone and that there is a team.  However, it is a matter of fact that Attorney Young is working alone.  

Thus, this is in clear violation of Rule 4-7.13(a)(3)

  1. According to Rule 4-7.11(a), the lawyer advertising rules in Florida apply to all forms of communication seeking legal employment in any print or electronic forum, including but not limited to newspapers, magazines, brochures, flyers, television, radio, direct mail, electronic mail, and Internet, including banners, pop-ups, websites, social networking, and video sharing media.  
  1. Under Rule 4-7.11(b), the lawyer advertising rules in Florida apply to lawyers admitted to practice in Florida advertising to provide legal services in Florida.  
  2. As explained in Rule 4-8.4(c), even though the lawyer advertising rules do not apply to some types of communications, the rule prohibiting conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation applies to all communications of a lawyer.

Exhibit #1 False Presentation of Specialties

CWY Legal & Consulting incorporated only in 2017 and its “headquarters” in in Craig W Young’s old 1br apartment of 760 sf. This site was actually presented all these “specialties” and “expertise” in 2018. Attorney Craig W Young is deceitful and the site is above puffery, it’s  closer to a scam. Attorney Craig W Young is in violation of Florida Bar rules.

EXHIBIT #2 Deceiving Picture of Offices

EXHIBIT #3 of The Main Real “Corporate Offices” an Old 1bd 1 br 760sf Apartment (“the penthouse”)

630 S. Sapodilla Ave., Unit 529, West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Tel:  561-568-1000

 

Exhibit #4 of The Real Second Address

Seems to belong to an inactive company Gateway Avenue LLC

EXHIBIT #5 Deceitful Tel Number?

The telephone number listed under Attorney Young belongs to another attorney at another address. Again, pretending to be more successful than reality with multiple addresses and telephone numbers while actually, it’s a single attorney looking for a job at $31.25 an hour. 

EXHIBIT #6 Another Deceitful Address Picture 

Note the description under the picture of the address. This is the phone number: 772-214-3029 as filed with the Florida Bar, which doesn’t belong to Attorney Craig W. Young and CWY Legal. Why does it feel like a scam? Because Attorney Craig W. Young and CWY Legal are the same person.  All calls are handled by Mr. Young who wants potential customers to feel that he has multiple addresses like a truly successful company. He only wants to scam customers into paying higher rates than they would pay had they know the truth: a single attorney with no real corporate office in a highrise but in an old small 1br 1br apartment.  

EXHIBIT #7 New Company With Little Experience 

EXHIBIT #8 Deceiving Presentation 

“Our vision” – there is only a single attorney 

“Attorneys” – there is only a single attorney. Even the implication that there may be plural can feel like a scam. It further leads to “Principle Attorney” which, again, is a fraud making potential customers think there may be multiple attorneys like the picture implies. 

“Practice Areas” – it’s only actually simple tax issues

Attorney Craig W Young Deceitful Practice Areas

With so little billable hours in any of these areas of claimed practice, it looks more like a deception or a scam. A specialty and practice area implies someone is doing it almost daily and has great understanding in the field and not someone who did it a couple of times for a particular customer or as an employee. 

EXHIBIT #9 Attorney Craig W. Young Solicits Reviews 

Attorney Young asks customers & friends for good reviews. At the time I interviewed Mr. Young, there were no reviews. After I placed my reviews, attorney Young asked customers, fake network noncustomers and others to vote or write positive for him in violation of Florida Bar rules.

Not only that attorney Craig W Young is “liking” himself to falsley show a higher number of likes, but he asks friends and “network” to inflate his like numbers on a professional legal page of his firm. That creates a false pretense of legal success which Mr. Young doesn’t possess. As such, Mr. Young is constantly marketing himself with hashtags. 

EXHIBIT #10 Attorney Craig W. Young Fraudulently Recommends Himself to Inflate or Scam Customers With False Number of Recommendations

EXHIBIT #11 Attorney Young Misuses Court Proceedings to Bully 

EXHIBIT #12 Self Promoting Deceptive Scam

Numerous times on social media Attorney Craig W. Young has been violating the RFFB. Attorney Young gave himself and his firm five stars, announced himself as “reasonably priced” and deceitfully called himself “trustworthy”. The inflation of his low rating is a scam by attorney Craig W. Young.

It is also deceptive to say that reviews were “false and defaming” when they were an expression of potential consumers’ opinions. A potential customer who was exposed to any interaction with Mr. Young or his deceitful actions or presentations is entitled to place an opinion. Attorney Young  is un-ethically acting to remove any opinion review which did not support him. Mr. Young is also lying but states that every attorney that scams his client is being investigated. For that reason, Attorney Young is incompetent and inexperienced as he further demonstrates by not understanding rule 230(c). 

EXHIBIT #13 Attorney Craig W Young Retaliates and Bullies Mr. Juravin With Slander & Libel 

I believe that the following deliberate actions are in violation of the Florida Bar Rules

Attorney Young Falsified Statements & Court Findings Into Malicious Defamation

  1. I was never found liable for similar allegations of exposing the truth. It was a simple matter of financial dispute for which I refused to cave in and stop exposing the truth in exchange for money. 
  2. “CWY Legal is providing…” is another violation of the FL Bar and misuse of the court proceedings as an attorney.
  3. Attorney Young links to a site with fake names and no real owner and thereby assumes liability to ALL defamation and lies on the site.
  4. With no real evidence at hand, Mr. Young lies and deceives the public, as he did the Court, about people he calls my “aliases” which can be simply my followers, other clients of his that were afraid to talk until now or adversaries. Without clear evidence at the time of writing it, this is malicious defamation by a Florida Bar attorney against a client. 

EXHIBIT #14 Attorney Young Falsified Court Documents, Deceives The Court and Judge Kerner

Attorney Young falsified two court hearing dates and submitted two orders for the judge to sign. None of these dates were coordinated with me as required by law. The Palm Beach court site clearly asks for a confirmation that the attorney clearly coordinated the dates. Attorney Young intentionally ignored the court’s rule and submitted to the judge an order to sign based on intentional false information. 

For filling #93041795 and filling #92423489

Attorney Young also deceived the court filing an emergency motion which according to the rules is not an emergency but only self serving. 

Attorney Young approached the court not with clean hands. Exhibit shows unprofessional bullying of attorney Young making unprofessional assumptions about my representation and lying about my hometown which is 4 hrs aways. 

EXHIBIT #14 Attorney Young 

Attorney Craig W. Young LIES to Google and Yelp

Mr. Young  apparently reported my various honest reviews to Google, Yelp and others as fake or untrue. At the same time, he accepted positive reviews of noncustomer. 

EXHIBITS #15 Bar Violation On Social Media Promotions

EXHIBITS #16 Deceiving Presentation of Attorneys

It looks like attorney Craig W Young scams potential customers to think that he has a team of minimum 5 attorneys collaborating. As if there is more than the reality of single young and inexperienced attorney which has no such team or offices. It feels more like a scam with the deceiving “OUR VISION” which can be easily viewed as the view of these attorneys. With this alleged scam attorney Young can charge more for “experience”, “team collaboration” and implied “success”.

“PRINCIPAL ATTORNEY” and “PARTNER” are another deception along with the multiple fake address. All in all, it seems to me that attorney Craig W Young site is a scam in it’s false advertising and untrue information. The site is far from reality: attorney Young is single, successful and not so experienced attorney who works from his old 1br small apartment.

Mr. Young’s pages appearing on sites that are used to promote the lawyer or law firm’s practice are subject to the lawyer advertising rules. These pages must therefore comply with all of the general regulations set forth in Rules 4-7.11 through 4-7.18 and 4-7.21. Regulations include prohibitions against any misleading information, which includes references to past results that are not objectively verifiable, predictions or guaranties of results, and testimonials that fail to comply with the requirements listed in Rule 4-7.13(b)(8). Regulations also include prohibitions against statements characterizing skills, experience, reputation or record unless they are objectively verifiable. Lawyers and law firms should review the lawyer advertising rules in their entirety to comply with their requirements. Additional information is available in the Handbook on Lawyer Advertising and Solicitation on the Florida Bar website. 

Attorney Young’s banner advertisement posted by a lawyer on a social networking site is subject not only to the requirements of Rules 4-7.11 through 4-7.18 and 4-7.21, but also must be filed for review unless the content of the advertisement is limited to the safe harbor information listed in Rule 4-7.16. See Rules 4-7.19 and 4-7.20(a). 

Attorney Young didn’t simply forget to add a disclaimer of dramatization. It’s an intentions scam for which attorney Craig W Young should be reprimanded. 

PART FIVE (Signature.): Under penalties of perjury, I declare that the foregoing facts are true, correct and complete.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: