Tag Archives: Lindborg & Mazor LLP

Irina Mazor of  Lindborg & Mazor llp was accused of being uncredible, making slanderous statements &  witness tampering in Krubinski-Mazor v Parex LaHabra, Peter Lindborg Implicated Too

If you are opposing counsel of Lindborg and Mazor LLP, we are glad you found us and hope we are helpful in your cause. You can find all the filings  screen shot below under David Mazor-Krubinski v  Parex LaHabra at the Orange County CA Superior Courts online system. I have many filings and am happy to share whole filings with you if you would like a copy. 

If you are considering hiring the firm, you may wish to consider this information we recently turned up in a suit alleging General Negligence.

Is Irina Mazor David Mazors go to girl for running interference for him?

Considering hiring the firm? Read this lawsuit claim against them first…

Opposing counsel in law suits are of course, your opponents. They are representing the party that you are suing or being sued by. Yet there are codes of conduct, both written and unwritten. between counsel.  You address one another formally, respectfully, even if you hate that person…it’s beneath most attorneys to get dirty. You work hard for your client, represent them appropriately, carry out your duty as their agent with civility and adhering to the code of ethics you swore to uphold when you became an attorney.

CSLB Takes Disciplinary Action Against WICR Waterproofing

A letter of admonishment has been issued to WICR Waterproofing and Construction by the CSLB for taking an illegal deposit over $1000 from a consumer.

Senate Bill (SB) 486 permits CSLB to issue a letter of admonishment to applicants, licensees, or registrants as an intermediate form of discipline between an advisory notice and a citation. Those who receive a letter can either comply with its terms or contest it in writing. This bill modified Business and Professions Codes (BPC) 7099.2 and 7124.6

We are aware that they related to the same case; however, they are seperate case numbers and outcomes on the specific licenses.

Mark Marsch is a Fraud and Completely Useless to WICR Waterproofing & Construction- Judge Found he Has “Implicit Bias” See Why

While the proposed decision of the court after a bench trial in WICR v Arceneaux didn’t come out in financial favor for the Arceneaux’s, it did serve to bury Mark Marsch from ever again being thought of as credible when it comes to being a consultant or expert witness for WICR.

Mark Marsch’s use to David Mazor should be about over with the finding of him having “an implied bias in favor of Plaintiff”

Does This Filing by Lindborg & Drill Reveal Their Secret Fear of WICRLeaks?

In A David Vs Goliath Lawsuit, David is Getting The Better of Goliath

WICR Waterproofing’s Attorneys Filing Attacks WICRLeaks as “Vituperative”

Describe themselves as “good people”. Hysterical they’re just like Donald Trump with their victim complex.

A recent filing by WICR Waterproofing’s attorney in a case before the court in San Bernadino may reveal WICR’s deep seated fear of this website.

In WICR Waterproofing vs Arceneaux, the defendants informed WICR’s attorneys that I am their expert/consultant. The reply back from Lindborg & Drill is pretty revealing. They, as well as WICR’s David Mazor, know very well that if I testify or provide an affadavit, that my information could prove to be very damaging to WICR and David Mazor.

The 23 page filing includes the following from Lindborg & Drill

Continue reading Does This Filing by Lindborg & Drill Reveal Their Secret Fear of WICRLeaks?

Court Rules Against WICR WATERPROOFING Again in WICR Vs Keck

  • WICR in Pursuit of a $1.3 Million Judgement for Damages
  • Bankruptcy Filing by Keck Prevented Collection
  • Years of Appeals Later, Court Affirms Keck’s Debt is Dischargeable in Bankruptcy

WICR just won’t give up hope of collecting a judgement from an ex-employee of theirs. Scott Keck and WICR have been battling for years with Keck’s lawyers getting the best of WICR’s attorneys time after time.

On March 5th the Court issued a ruling regarding the dischargeablity of the judgement in bankruptcy, affirming the bankruptcy courts finding that the debt is dischargeable. https://www.leagle.com/decision/infdco20200309737   This link takes you to a copy of the decision on another website.

Continue reading Court Rules Against WICR WATERPROOFING Again in WICR Vs Keck