Letter: Case proves Andrews not best for job

From: Paul Rothrock


Scott Andrews is not a friend of mine. I suppose you could consider him my attorney. I had hired Terry Coriden’s firm to represent me on a case. Coriden passed me on to Scott Andrews. I had never met Scott before but had asked questions as to his abilities to friends. They said he had worked in the prosecutor’s office and that’s all they knew about him.

The case Scott worked on for me lasted about two-and-a-half years. I’ve been to depositions with him where I felt he was unprepared, I’ve sat in arbitration with him and I’ve been in the courtroom with him. I had experienced Scott beyond belief. When the judgment came down that I won, I had won less than 10 percent of my damages, attorney fees and witness fees, which felt more like I had lost. When I questioned Scott about the amount, he advised me that the judge could rule as he sees the case and explained there was nothing he or I could do about it. About 29 days later I receive an email from his office stating that since they had not heard from me in regard to the amount, the court ruling would be final.

Scott has friends in this community, and friends will vote for friends. But for voters who believe they are voting for the most qualified by the amount of signs they see may be voting for the one who has larger financial supporters. I have a new take on an old adage: “Those who can, do; those who can’t, teach.” And those who can’t teach, think they can be a judge.