Menu
Login
Any litigant, witness and/or attorney who has been on the opposing side of a case with Sharon Easley knows that Easley is a mean-spirited opponent who delays divorce cases with antics, destructive flamboyance, and fear. Easley intimidates opposition witnesses and counsel alike and feels no reservation about misrepresenting facts to the court and others. Easley uses 'Rambo' and 'Hitler' style tactics and litigation to get what she wants as Easley thinks everything should happen 'the Sharon Easley way'.
Easley files false and malicious motions with the court so she can create conflict and keep herself gainfully employed. Anyone who experiences Easley filing continuous motions against them needs to file a Motion for Sanctions and have Easley sanctioned for her malicious prosecution and abuse of process. Easley uses court motions, discovery and interrogatories to go on a 'fishing expedition' so she can fabricate and create 'allegations' which have no basis of fact or evidence to substantiate them. It all translates into billable hours.
Easley is not a good attorney and likes to fire at will upon any target of opportunity which appears on the legal landscape. Good attorneys mediate and do not like litigation or have time for it. Bad attorneys, like Easley, use litigation to keep themselves gainfully employed.
The one consistent theme that runs throughout Easley's motion papers is her use of personal attacks and unduly inflammatory language in her certifications and briefs. Use of such language does nothing to assist the court in deciding the merits of a motion, wastes judicial resources by requiring the court to wade through the superfluous verbiage to decipher the substance of the motion, does not serve the client's interests well, and generally debases the judicial system and the profession.
Easley crosses the boundary of legitimate advocacy into personal recrimination against her adversary. Easley creates conflict rather than resolving it because conflict translates into billable hours. Easley makes your divorce worse, rather than better, and damages both spouses and the children. The only sure way to keep Easley from ruining your life is to not hire her as your attorney and be prepared, if you are on the opposing side, for her unethical tactics and malicious abuse of process so that she does not make your divorce costly, lengthy and full of conflict.
Do not let Easley take control of your divorce. She will try to take control and basically tell you to 'sit back, trust her and let her do the job you are paying her to do'. This is a big red flag and you might as well give Easley a blank check and tell her to fill in the amount when she is finished. Take control of your divorce and make Easley be accountable to you and do not let her initiate any actions or proceedings without your written consent.
Anyone who has experience with Easley and her tactics and has suffered emotional duress and/or financial loss should do one or more of the following:
1. File a grievance with the State Bar of Texas.
2. Consult an attorney who handles marital torts, if you are the opposing side, and pursue tort litigation against Easley and your ex-spouse. The common marital torts are: fraud, constructive fraud, malicious prosecution and abuse of process, parental alienation, aiding and abetting, conspiracy, spoliation, conversion, forfeiture, perjury, assault and battery, rape, transmission of a venereal disease, interference with custody, breach of fiduciary duty, intentional destruction or disposal of property, harassment, invasion of privacy, wiretapping and recording conversations that recorder is not privy to (this is a felony), false imprisonment and civil RICO. Easley likes to aid and abet her clients to commit marital torts because she can then screw the opposing spouse and accomplish the motives and wishes of her client. She conspires with her clients to commit marital torts so she makes sure she is paid first and gets her money.
3. Consult a malpractice attorney if Easley represented you and you have suffered financial and/or emotion duress because of Easley's unethical tactics of malicious prosecution, intentional tort abuse and abuse of process. In the event your spouse / ex-spouse sues you for a marital tort then your only defense will be to cross countersue your attorney for legal malpractice. If you acted based on the directive of your attorney and justifiably relied on what Easley told you, then malpractice will work as your defense. Malpractice will not be a defense if you and Easley conspired to commit the torts and Easley aided and abetted you. Easley is well known for executing tort conspiracies to defraud the opposing spouse and create conflict so that she can generate 'billable hours' for court time.
4. Check your statement and scrutinize your charges in detail. Easley likes to initiate actions without her client's consent. Dispute and refuse to pay any items that you did not authorize or agree to. Also compare your statement from Easley against your spouse's attorney's statement, if possible, and make sure Easley is not billing for phone time or correspondence with your spouse's attorney that never happened as she is known for doing this.
Many divorce lawyers do not discuss marital tort actions with their clients. This applies to Easley because she does not want you to know that she is going to 'screw' and 'rob' you and your ex-spouse by using and advising her clients to commit marital torts as a means to an end. Some lawyers who specialize in the field of tort law believe that when a divorce lawyer fails to explore the possibility of a martial tort action with a client, that the lawyer has committed malpractice.
The entire controversy doctrine is a legal theory that, in some states, requires a litigant to bring all his or her claims from the same series events or with the same parties in one action. The statute of limitations for filing a marital tort suite is generally between three to five years from the date of discovery by the injured party.
The complaint has been investigated and resolved to the customer’s satisfaction.
LOL! OMG, stickmynosein... you are just as delusional as your attorney. Hope you both can sleep at night knowing that instead of hurting the other spouse (which is always the motive) you really are hurting the children in the end. Let's be honest neither you nor your attorney really care about what is in the children's best interest.
So all I have to say is WHATEVER!
Gee "stickmynosein", It sure sounds like you have a personal relationship with Easley and she must have paid you to "promote her" as she has a very bad reputation in Collin County with 99% of the attorneys and judges. We can see right thru this one.
Sharon is awesome. She's a great attorney and will kick your attorney's [censor] which is what you want in paying for representation.
Sharon Easley took great care of my family and all my referrals. She was a stranger to me prior to my working with her and has been nothing but an oustanding and caring professional. She is welcomed in my home and invited to all my family gatherings. I trust her with my most precious of assets; my children. Lawyers are expensive and when people are emotionally charged they always think they're right about everything. My ex spent over $250k with 9 different lawyers just to end up with nothing. Why? Becuase she's crazy and thought that spending money equated to justice. It doesn't. And it all came out in the wash. I'd like a full psychiatric eval done on all these folks that were "ruined" by a lawyer. You probably ruined your own lives.
My ex-husband used Lisa Marquis for our divorce and for years thereafter, filing motions filled with lies and fraud. Easley and Marquis and sociopaths with narcissistic personality disorders. Combine them with an ex-husband who has been diagnosed the same and you have a recipe for destruction of lives- most terribly, my precious child's. Everything about Easley is also true for her partner Marquis. Greed is there only motivator. They lied about me, filed orders that contained language and agreements that NEVER transpired-requiring more litigation for nunc pro tuncs, etc. Filed motions for clarification for hundreds of violations of the orders and failure to pay child support so the ex would have "excuses" for his failure to obey court orders; placed homing devices on my vehicle (federal offense that was dismissed by another of her judge comrades). That is the only way Easley and Marquis carry out unethical, unprofessional and criminal conduct-they have personal relationships with judges who allow them to ruin the courtroom. In the meantime, according to child psychologists who know my child say, "life is irreparably damaged in ways that no amount of therapy could ever remedy". People who employ Easley and Marquis: do you really want to win at all costs? If you do, then you are just the same as these two women: PURE EVIL. You may not care now, but in the end, you WILL be judged by the only one who counts!
Texas Ethics Commission vs Sharon Easley
Please check out this website for the entire complaint.
http://www.ethics.state.tx.us/sworncomp/2006/260252.pdf
The Texas Ethics Commission (the commission) met on November 28, 2006 to consider sworn complaint SC-260252. A quorum of the commission was present. The commission determined that there is credible evidence of a technical or de minimis violation of sections 253.094 and 253.003(b) of the Election Code, and credible evidence of a violation of sections 254.031, 254.0611, and 254.063 of the Election Code, laws administered and enforced by the commission. To resolve and settle this complaint without further proceedings, the commission proposes this resolution to the respondent.
II. Allegations
The complaint alleges that the respondent accepted political contributions from corporations, failed to properly report political contributions, political expenditures, and loans, failed to disclose the principal occupation and job title of contributors and the full name of the employer or law firm of contributors, and failed to timely file semiannual campaign finance reports.
III. Facts Supported by Credible Evidence
Credible evidence available to the commission supports the following findings of fact:
1. The respondent was an unsuccessful candidate for district judge.
2. The 30-day before the election campaign finance report filed by the respondent on February 6, 2006 discloses contributions from two corporations.
3. The respondent filed a corrected report in response to this complaint in which she removed those contributions from the report and states that the contributions were sent directly to the campaign treasurer who deposited them into the campaign account.
4. The respondent swears that she did not become aware that the checks had been written on corporate accounts until she saw a draft of the report.
5. The respondent was unable to remember the exact date she learned that the contributions were from corporations. She was fairly certain that it was after the end of the reporting period since the report had been drafted for her review, which typically took place on the day before or on the due date of the filing. The end of the reporting period for the 30-day campaign finance report was January 26, 2006, and the report due date was February 6, 2006.
6. The respondent’s January 2006 semiannual campaign finance report disclosed $14, 000 in unitemized loans without showing detailed information on this or any previous report.
7. The respondent’s sworn statement explains that she misunderstood the appropriate way to report political expenditures from personal funds.
8. The respondent filed a corrected report in response to this complaint in which she removed the loan schedule and moved 16 of the political expenditures totaling approximately $14, 600 from Schedule F to Schedule G to indicate that they were paid out of personal funds.
9. The corrected January 2006 semiannual report discloses four expenditures totaling $2, 800 that were added to Schedule F, and $93 that was added to the total unitemized expenditures. The corrected report now discloses an additional $2, 893 in political expenditures. The total political contributions maintained were increased by $600.
10. On the January 2006 semiannual report, the respondent omitted the occupation job title, and/or employer information was omitted on 27 of the 29 reported contributions from individuals. This information was disclosed on the corrected report filed in response to this complaint.
11. The respondent’s sworn statement explains that she misunderstood the reporting requirements for individuals and attorneys who contributed from their personal funds rather than from their business or law firm funds.
12. The July 2005 semiannual campaign finance report was due on July 15, 2005. The respondent filed the report on July 14, 2005. Upon request of the commission, the respondent filed this report again on August 24, 2005, due to a software issue in which the contributions maintained was not received by the Ethics Commission. This report was not considered a late report, so a late fine was not administratively assessed.
13. The January 2006 semiannual report was due on January 17, 2006, and the respondent’s report was filed on January 19, 2006.
14. In the affidavit submitted in response to the commission’s late letter, the respondent explained that on the filing deadline, construction work next door to her office caused the power and telephone service to be cut off and it was not restored until after the filing deadline.
15. The data in the report was lost with the power outage, and in preparing the report the following day, the respondent was unable, on numerous attempts, to successfully transmit the report to the commission.
16. According to the affidavit, she was apparently using the wrong program, so she contacted Texas Ethics Commission technical support and eventually succeeded in transmitting the report on January 19, 2006.
Sharon Easley — Fraudulent activity
Ruined By Easley
Plano, Texas
U.S.A.
Life savings gone to Easley over minutia
My ex-wife and I decided to get divorced. It was mutual. We had no arguments about property. It was simple. Then Sharon and Casey got my ex all fired up and now we have spent our life savings fighting over minutia. Even my ex will even say Sharon is nuts. She runs to court and files motions without authorization. Yes she makes the worst possible accusation regarding fathers and daughters with no evidence. Now our daughter's college fund is gone, life insurance cashed in to pay lawyers, life savings gone - all for nothing. She should be avoided at all cost. Women with no self confidence trust her to protect them but in fact she just takes their money. I'm all for fighting vigorously if there is a cause. She just likes to fight and find ways to get rich
. It's very sad. Actually.. despicable. She is a vulture who preys on women under the guise of protecting them. Shameful...
http://www.yellowbot.com/user/sharone
Don't use Easley and Marquis!1”
Easley & Marquis
I was charged over $30, 000 for a divorce and there were a long list of things done wrong or incompletely, costing me additional sums with other attorneys. Examples are:
1. Payment from my ex husband was not detailed as simple of compound interest in the contracts. When I asked Easley about it, she said "well, you'll just have to sue him later".
2. The payment document was missing critical other elements, such as the length of term, causing me to retain another attorney to fix her errors.
3. She FORCED collaborative law on me, inferring it would be cheaper, which would not have been the case and even though it was against my wishes because I had an abusive husband and did not wish to sit at tables with him regularly. I had to fight her to execute a non-collaborative law approach.
4. Easley was patronizing to me on a daily basis. Telling me things like: "that is none of your business" when I was asking about documents in my own divorce. Was belittling to me and my Father, who attended meetings to support me.
5. Did not supply me with all final documents. I had to pay to receive them from Collin County Courthouse directly.
BAD ATTORNEYS... don't engage Easley and Marquis!
Posted on July 18, 2008
How do you know this and why don't you produce evidence to support your argument instead of making general and biased assumptions? You must be an "insider" who knows or works for Easley and is trying to defend her unethical and fraudulent practices?
This guy got a bum deal from a good lawyer and he is just angry and wants to get revenge. If I need a lawyer, I want one who is aggressive and looks out for me!