Heide Velarde
1/5
When I requested with the State Bar of California for a mandatory fee arbitration Summer L. Nastich was the arbitrator who agreed to hear my case. I was disputing the fees that my retrial attorney charged me without my authorization.
Since there was no stenographer present at the hearing Nastich wore that hat as a poor substitute who required that we speak slowly so she could write down as each of us took turns speaking. This is a task Nastich should not handle as I discovered incorrect statements noted on her Arbitration Findings. It states, "This dispute is about three distinct items for which Attorney advanced costs and then deducted the amounts from Client's recovery" and the second time it's quoted as a crucial issue "under a contingency fee arrangement in which the Attorney advances costs." These Arbitration Findings are incorrect. My attorney never advanced costs. I paid all costs in advance and my attorney deducted the fee amounts from my settlement.
As I continued reading the Arbitration Findings I discovered that Nastich failed to understand me and misinterprets the biggest item that I disputed in addition to the incorrect statements in her findings. She states, "Client contends...he changed the deal after he received the money" This is an incorrect statement. If Nastich reviews my statements on the retainer fee agreement she will see that as the client, I contend he changed the agreement before he received the money. Nastich also stated "her reasoning on why is somewhat unclear." Yet when Nastich had the opportunity to ask me questions at the hearing she never mentioned to me that she didn't understand my reasoning. Due to her inability to resolve this problem at the hearing I cannot recommend her for arbitration services. In addition, the documents and receipts that I presented for my case she ignored as crucial evidence which I don't think an experienced arbitrator would do.
In contrast, Nastich clearly understood my attorney at the hearing. That's because it takes an attorney to understand another attorney which is why she had no problems with my attorney's testimony. She believed every word my attorney spoke of as being truthful by stressing twice "Attorney testified vehemently under oath" and "Attorney testified under oath", but she makes no reference of me as the client testifying under oath. This explains why she favored the award to my attorney instead of to me by stating, "The Arbitrator finds Attorney's testimony more persuasive."
However, I have been praised during an employee evaluation as being an analytical thinker. It's a skill that I am proud to have cultivated so I can tell you from my personal observation of Nastich that she has no analytical skill that I noticed. And, therefore, her ineptitude was on display when she was unable to resolve the problem she had dealing with my testimony. In addition, due to her partial view of this case she's naive and totally mislead by my attorney who testified to false information in item one, a fabricated account in item two, and when he fell for a bait and switch in item three she misinterprets the agreement. She states "the Agreement entitled Attorney to reimbursement for this cost." "based on evidence" of "zealously advocating for a refund, but to no avail." In other words, although I received no benefit from this agreement I'm not entitled to reimbursement based on my attorney inquiring the extent of a refund that's denied to him. It's an Arbitration Finding she determines with no analytical skill. Due to being gullible she failed to ask pertinent questions I expect an arbitrator would do. It stands to reason that if she had any analytical skill she would have been smart enough to question my attorney thoroughly like I would have done if I were the arbitrator.
If you're a client in a dispute with your attorney like I've been through, pray that you don't get Nastich as your arbitrator otherwise if you agree to have her hear your case you too will lose the award like I did and your attorney will be the one to benefit from the award due to your loss.
