disbarred | One Bad Decision Away From Homelessness

Divorced Dads Tim Bickford (left), and Dan Shepard shared their testimony recently on, ‘Frankly Speaking’ about how their complaints to the Attorney Discipline Office (ADO) in Concord NH, may have prompted both Brian D. Kenyon and Keri J. Marshall, of Marshall Law in East Kingston NH, to resign as Attorneys instead of answering some very serious unethical allegations. Specifically, Kenyon and Marshall had represented the ex-wives of both Bickford and Shepard. This video is just less than an hour long, and it’s well worth the watch.

This episode of, ‘Frankly Speaking’ featured two divorced dads, Tim Bickford and Dan Shepard, who each filed ethical complaints against their ex wives attorneys working out of the Marshall Law office on 47 Depot Road in East Kingston NH. The interview took place in the Nashua Public TV studio on 1/25/24.

Both Bickford and Shepard represented themselves Pro Se and filed their complaints with the, Attorney Discipline Office (ADO) in Concord NH about 10 years apart – Shepard in 2012 against Atty. Keri J. Marshall, and Bickford in 2022 against Atty. Brian D. Kenyon. Marshall and Kenyon opted to resign as Lawyers rather than go through any intense scrutiny of these ethical complaints. There was also another individual, Michael Kimball, who also filed a complaint with the ADO shortly after Bickford did in ’22. Apparently, Kimball had a meeting with Ms. Marshall for over an hour and was billed about $300. When his case fell apart because there was no action taken on it, Marshall then informed Kimball that she wasn’t a licensed Lawyer anymore in NH, hence Kimball’s complaint to the ADO office.

Unfortunately, there were no newspapers, or electronic media outlets (radio and TV) who pursued this story. A NH state-wide news blog, Granite Grok did a fairly nice article about this situation. A nationwide site – ProtectiveMothersRevolution.org , included both Kenyon and Marshall onto something it refers to as: the ‘Wall of Shame’. Then another entity called, The Committee to Expose Dishonest & Incompetent Judges, Attorneys & Public Officials on the site, NoEthics.net , referred to Atty. Kenyon as an, ‘idiotic slacker’.

One unusual aspect to the, Granite Grok article, published on, 1/16/24 – the Marshall Law office on 47 Depot Road in East Kingston, despite not currently having any licensed attorneys employed with that organization, it still has a sign in front of its building giving folks the impression that it’s still operating as a Law firm. Somebody like Michael Kimball, however, would probably disagree 100% with that statement.

Incidentally, if you wish to contact the organization that Bickford represented the first time he appeared on, ‘Frankly Speaking’, several years ago – The Fathers Rights’ Movement of New Hampshire – please log onto: Facebook.com/TFRMNH . Since that TV appearance, however, Bickford is no longer actively involved with that group.

Boston area singer Sharon DiFronzo of Screamin Heart records sang the intro and outro theme song to this particular episode.

Atty. Roland L. Milliard

Question: Why don’t sharks ever attack Lawyers?
Answer: Professional courtesy.
— Boston personal injury lawyer James Sokolove in a TV commercial
__________________________________________________

Question: Why did God create snakes before He created Lawyers?
Answer: He needed the practice.
— a scene from the popular AMC TV show, ‘Better Call Saul’

First of all, I respect Internet forums which solicit opinions from various people, even the ones that adhere to rules which I might happen to disagree with. They’re certainly entitled to their First Amendment right of Free Speech so even though I may not agree with their setup, I can certainly respect them. Hence, we have the words of a great philosopher who once said, “That’s why God created both chocolate and vanilla ice cream.”

Heck, there are probably a fair number of web surfers who have come here on, One Bad Decision Away from Homelessness, only to shake their heads and say, “Why is this Moderator running his site THIS way when he ought to be running it THAT way?” To those particular folks, I would just suggest that they click on the option titled, ABOUT, and read the part that states, “If this particular website is not to your liking, please feel free to do your web surfing elsewhere.” The items that you happen to see posted on this blog are ones that I happen to have an interest in, and I’m definitely not trying to compete in some type of Internet popularity contest.

The reason I bring this up is that while I was recently posting comments on a lawyer-related site, AVVO.com, specifically about my former attorney, Roland “Conflict of Interest” Milliard, whose office is located in Dracut MA, I noticed that this forum not only solicited comments from current and former clients, but it also wanted to hear from fellow lawyers, as well.

Needless to say, I don’t know why this site does that. My former lawyer in question, Atty. Milliard, got an outstanding review on this site from another attorney whose office is about 25 miles from Milliard’s and does most of their practice in the Boston area, while Milliard mostly works out of the Lowell MA area. So they’re not really in direct competition with each other.

But what positive outcome could another lawyer have by publicly trashing Milliard on a site like that? Let’s say, for example, a lawyer who had just publicly criticized Milliard on that forum is approached by a guy who’s faced with a Divorce and a Child Support situation. Then Milliard, ironically, is approached by that guy’s wife for representation on the same legal matter. The lawyer who just trashed Milliard on the Internet now finds himself with a Conflict of Interest of sorts because much of the husband’s case is contingent upon being able to amicably negotiate with the opposing counsel (in this case Milliard) to at least settle somewhat for what they were hoping for. Not only does Milliard have the proverbial upper hand by representing a Wife in a Massachusetts Family Court situation, he’s probably going to be less inclined to openly negotiate with an attorney who publicly criticized him on an Internet blog.

It should be noted here too that Milliard also served as President for the Greater Lowell Bar Association, an organization comprised of a couple hundred local attorneys, about 5-6 years ago. Yet, all this guy could get was one (1) fellow lawyer to post a review on that rather popular Internet site on his behalf? The one lawyer who posted a review on Milliard, for example, received approximately a dozen outstanding evaluations them self on the same site. So why not show the same type of love and respect for a former President of the Greater Lowell Bar Association? Could it perhaps be that those couple hundred lawyers didn’t want to compromise their credibility or reputations by claiming that Milliard was a tremendous attorney when they realized, in their heart of hearts, that nothing could be further from the truth?

Most of the reviews I found on AVVO by attorneys evaluating other attorneys were absolutely outstanding. It’s as if they’re all “good buddies” with each other outside the courtroom and they have no qualms about submitting positive reviews on behalf of their rivals, even if they’re engaging in some type of impropriety and actually deserve to be publicly called out on their shortcomings. But let’s get real – other lawyers honestly don’t have the same “skin in the game”, (i.e., paying their outrageous fees) as current and former clients do when retaining attorneys for their services. And with all the criticism and jokes about shady lawyers – how often do you hear about them actually being prosecuted in court for some type of impropriety?

If something like mismanaging clients’ Retainer fees get blatantly out-of-control, you might hear about them getting either suspended or disbarred, but not really that often. There seems to be more stuff in the media trashing dishonest auto mechanics than dishonest lawyers, although I think the percentages are basically about the same. It seems like more people are intimidated by confronting lawyers probably because they’re often worth a lot more money than most people, along with their usual ability to play semantics (a.k.a. bullCRAP) with just about every argument they make.

Intelligence, Confidentiality, Assertiveness & Courtroom Savvy

One of the compliments that lawyer gave Milliard in their review was that he’s very smart. So what the heck does that really mean? Milliard, Alan Dershowitz, and F. Lee Bailey all successfully passed the Massachusetts Bar Exam to become “bonafide” lawyers. Maybe Milliard scored a number of points higher on that exam than either Dershowitz or Bailey. If so, what the heck does that prove? If you’re paying one of these “professionals” in the neighborhood of about $300 per hour to successfully represent you in a Court of Law, are you more concerned about your attorney’s “intelligence” or their “courtroom savvy”, a.k.a. their ability to possibly sway a Judge or a Jury into their way of thinking?

And since we’re talking about Atty. Milliard here, what would you gauge as a higher priority when selecting a Lawyer to possibly represent you in Court: Confidentiality or Courtroom Savvy? My basic beef with Milliard is that he chose to ignore Massachusetts Rules for Attorneys by backstabbing me and representing a client who sued me – all without first getting my permission. Besides that, Milliard has an absolute piss-poor losing record on representing high-profile cases throughout his nearly 30 year legal career. In the great words of disgraced comedian, Bill Cosby, “the proof is in the pudding.”

In the half dozen or so postings I’ve done on this forum regarding Atty. Milliard, I’ve never referred to this guy as being stupid, and I would agree with that lawyer on their Internet review that he’s probably got a higher I.Q. than the average schmuck on the street.

Another great myth a lot of people usually get screwed on when choosing a lawyer to represent them, is going with someone perceived to either be a Pitbull or an s.o.b. – Milliard, incidentally, fits both of these descriptions – inside or outside of a courtroom. But again, how the heck does “assertiveness” supersede “courtroom savvy” when going with someone to represent your best interests in a lawsuit? Granted, with all other factors being equal, I would just assume go with a lawyer who’s more aggressive in their approach than one who’s passive because I would tend to feel more comfortable on my chances of winning. But if my attorney is cut from the same cloth as Mahatma Gandhi, for example, and he’s got a passive, uncanny knack for constantly convincing the Judge and Jury into his way of thinking, then that might be the right way to go in Court.

Mixed reviews here when it comes to ‘Relatives’

One fascinating comment that lawyer posted on Milliard’s Internet review was that they’d have no qualms whatsoever, on having one of their relatives represented by Milliard. After reading that line, I couldn’t help but think of the community Milliard’s office is situated in, Dracut Massachusetts, which the main activity involving its Police department is in regards to, Domestic violence issues – especially on the Thanksgiving Day holiday, when relatives are usually all together.

So I doubt the lawyer posting that statement could successfully pass a Polygraph (Lie Detector) test making the same comment – unless, of course, they were thinking of a relative that they truly hate or dislike. But I think I can easily pose a few questions here, based on Milliard’s own previous testimony, that that lawyer would NOT want to be asked about while being attached to one of these machines:

On November 2012, Milliard was quoted in the Lowell Sun that he had about eight (8) convicted sex offender clients who visit his office on a regular basis. So if you had a young nephew or niece about 5-6 years old, would you want them to accompany either your brother or sister into Milliard’s waiting room, and then see a strange looking individual who says to them, what a beautiful boy or girl they’ve got there. Do you see a potential problem with that scenario already? And what exactly is the restroom situation in Milliard’s office? Can only one person use it at a time, or can a few people use it simultaneously?

If you had a brother or a male cousin who needed a lawyer for an upcoming Divorce and Child Custody battle, would you honestly want them to watch Milliard’s YouTube video on how EASY and SIMPLE it is for husbands to get custody of their kids after a Massachusetts Divorce case? Heck, as a Massachusetts lawyer yourself, DO YOU honestly think it’s EASY and SIMPLE for a husband to win custody of their kids after a Massachusetts Divorce? It’s obvious that Milliard was just preying on vulnerable, desperate husbands grasping for some semblance of hope to retain a normal relationship with their kids again.

Last and by all means Least, if you had a relative who was facing either an ‘Operating Under the Influence’, or a, ‘Driving Under the Influence’ conviction, why the heck would YOU want a complete Shyster like Milliard to represent them when he couldn’t even defend himself of that same charge back in ’99??? At that point in time, Milliard already had about eight (8) years of experience as a lawyer – he was probably well aware of what he was facing from a Defendant’s perspective. It’s sort of like Milliard is just taking his client’s money to build his own bank account, and then going through the motions of pretending to be a Lawyer and representing them in court. If you think I’m wrong here, let’s see Milliard’s “success” rate on representing clients facing DUI or OUI situations. Somehow I think if Milliard was ever pressed on the issue, he’d probably claim those types of files are “confidential” and nobody else’s business.

Milliard avoids mentioning ‘Legal Case’ experience on AVVO resume

On promoting himself and his law practice on the AVVO website, Milliard came off as extremely dull, boring and lackluster — especially for an attorney who’s been involved in that profession for almost three decades and is currently 60-something. Milliard isn’t exactly viewed as a “rising star” at this point in his career, he’s more like someone who’s “rounding Third and heading for Home”, professionally speaking.

When submitting reviews for a couple other local lawyers, Milliard referred to himself as a, “Speeding and traffic ticket attorney” — as if to indicate that’s his specialty. Dude…seriously? Way back, when I was on friendlier terms with Milliard, I specifically asked him for advice on challenging a Speeding ticket, which I wound up failing miserably. This begs the question though, what is his clients’ success rate on fighting (and actually winning) Speeding ticket hearings in Court? If they’re like most cases Milliard represents, I would assume the final verdicts must really suck on his clients’ behalf.

I distinctly remember him telling me that one of the best ways an individual can beat a speeding ticket in Court is if the actual Officer who gave you that Citation didn’t show up for the hearing — that’s how the law goes in Massachusetts anyway. So if Milliard does have any high-ranking contacts with that community’s Police Department, or maybe an influential politician in that town or city, I can see that scumbag exploiting this option to try to ensure that that particular Officer failed to show up for that hearing at that time and date. However, if the Officer did show up for that hearing, I would bet my money for the Speeding Ticket to still be upheld over Milliard’s client at least 99.9 percent of the time. Hence, it’s worth demanding Milliard to substantiate his “success” rate in these types of cases, otherwise, just go elsewhere for your legal representation.

Can you imagine if popular, successful lawyers like Alan Dershowitz or F. Lee Bailey suddenly referred to themselves as, “Speeding and traffic ticket attorneys”? It would be absolutely hysterical, as well as the proverbial end of their respective careers for all intents and purposes. But then again, when we’re talking about Atty. Milliard, who still promotes a ‘Free Initial Consultation’, appears to frequently represent Court Appointed clients, and posted a YouTube video claiming just how EASY and SIMPLE it is for divorced husbands to win custodial rights of their kids, then calling yourself a “Speeding and traffic ticket attorney” makes about as much sense as anything else all in a vain attempt to dupe vulnerable clients to avail themselves with his rather poor excuse of a Law practice.

Milliard starts off by talking about his stint in the U.S. Navy, and ending it by stating that he was staunchly involved with both the American Legion and AMVETS. Words like: “successful” and “winning” were no where to be found in this self-initiated Resume. So citing one’s military experience, along with any subsequent involvement they may have with veterans’ groups, might be valuable for a person running for public office, or maybe seeking a government job like with the Internal Revenue Service, Homeland Security, etc., but again, if you’re paying an attorney about $300 per hour you basically just want to retain a lawyer capable and qualified of winning your case. Who really cares about all this patriotic military crap?

It should be noted here too, I happen to be an honorably-discharged military veteran (U.S. Air Force) and Milliard still chose to represent an individual who never served in the military to sue me in Court. So aside being in blatant conflict of interest between a lawyer and his client, where was Milliard’s military veteran allegiance to me six years ago?

Milliard’s explanation of which part of his Navy tenure was spent in the Reserves (one weekend a month and two weeks in the Summer) versus Active Duty (contractual full-time obligation usually for at least two years) is vague and ambiguous at best. In the ‘Work Experience’ section of his AVVO resume, Milliard claims he served as a ‘Legal Officer’ during his Navy stint, yet he didn’t actually attend law school till the year after he left the military. Are we to believe that the Navy prosecutes, convicts, and incarcerates its own members with a justice system which its Legal Officers are not required to hold law degrees?

Quick, can somebody please get me the phone number to, Ripley’s Believe it or Not.

For some strange reason, Milliard stated, “In the time I have been practicing, I have handled well over a thousand cases, both Civil and Criminal.” As the great Philosopher once said, So What? Since we’re talking about Atty. Milliard here: Did he win most of those “well over a thousand cases”? I seriously doubt it.

As far as Atty. Milliard touting his stint(s) as the President of the Greater Lowell Bar Association, lets not kid ourselves here — he wasn’t exactly elected to that post because of his savvy and successful courtroom reputation. While about 99.9 percent of the lawyers practicing in the Greater Lowell area are too busy representing and “actually winning” for their clients, Milliard instead chose to plan wine and cheese social gatherings for his fellow rival attorneys. Why would any would-be client — with at least a half of a brain in their head — even remotely consider this as a viable qualification to retain Milliard to represent them in a lawsuit?

The thing most disturbing about Atty Milliard’s blurb on AVVO were the items he chose to ignore. Unlike many other attorneys, Milliard had nothing posted under the categories of “Speaking Engagements” or “Publications”. Not surprisingly, Milliard also chose not to submit AVVO a photo of himself to help promote this particular section — but maybe that was a good thing since Milliard sort of looks (and acts) like the Second Coming of the late great actor Chris Farley in the movie, Tommy Boy.

But even more than that, why didn’t Milliard cite anything on his AVVO resume about his ‘Legal Cases’? Out of supposedly, “more than a thousand cases”, Milliard couldn’t even pick out at least a dozen successful verdicts? Seriously? That might, arguably, be the ONLY relevant part of AVVO resumes. What better way to gauge the actual effectiveness of an attorney than researching several of their previous successful cases?

Another point that’s definitely worth mentioning here — for those who are not familiar with Dracut Massachusetts, it happens to be a “border town” to the state of New Hampshire. Most attorneys who have offices in Dracut, not only have licenses to practice Law in Massachusetts but neighboring New Hampshire as well. A lot of the lawyers situated in Dracut even have licenses to practice in Florida, where many of the local residents go “wintering” every year. Atty. Milliard, on the other hand, is only licensed to practice Law in Massachusetts — that probably concedes a lot of potential clients away to rival attorneys due to Milliard’s own laziness and lack of versatility.

In summary here, I guess a lawyer can socialize with other lawyers to have lunch or maybe a few drinks somewhere, but a client has a heck of a lot more at stake whenever they’re faced with a lawsuit or a court case. I would highly suggest that if you’re looking for a good lawyer to represent you, and you’re familiar with AVVO or avvo.com, please take other lawyers’ comments with a grain of salt – in the long run, they’re probably not going to help you.

As for more information on Atty. Roland Milliard, please check out some of the other postings on this site I’ve done on this guy. Do an Archive search on LowellSun.com to look up some of this guy’s high profile cases. Why not go to the Lowell (MA) District Court to investigate his own OUI conviction back in ’99? That should give you a pretty good start to figure out what Atty. Milliard is all about. In other words, if life were fair — which it obviously is not — Roland Milliard should’ve been DISBARRED from ever practicing Law again in Massachusetts (or anywhere else in this country), a long, long, long time ago. Before giving Milliard some type of ridiculous Retainer fee, just remember the great statement in the Biblical book of 1 Corinthians – “If a man (or woman) be Ignorant, let him (or her) be Ignorant.”

P.S. I would’ve loved to have posted all these aforementioned comments on the AVVO website itself, unfortunately, some bimbo representative there named, Anna chose to ban me from that forum stating that she/it didn’t actually think I was ever represented by Atty. Milliard and I needed to substantiate my claims against him. When I mentioned that it should investigate Lowell Sun newspaper Archive files, or look into the Lowell (MA) District Court for Milliard’s OUI arrest in ’99 yourself, Anna stated that the onus wasn’t on AVVO to investigate any adverse claims made against lawyers. So instead, AVVO relegates itself to posting a whole bunch of false information (a.k.a., Lies) on attorney reviews due to its own laziness and professional incompetence.

File Under: Even More, Very Very Fake News.

Can a convicted “Perjurer”, as well as a “disbarred” Lawyer possibly be named – TIME Magazine’s ‘2024 Person of the Year’? If Trump winds up in Prison, it’ll be because of Michael Cohen’s court testimony

Disgraced, ethically-challenged NH Lawyers, Kenyon & Marshall (now Former attorneys), just simply BLEEPED with the Wrong Guys

Should Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg be Disbarred & face Prison time for “leaking” a sealed Indictment to the Media? Is Bragg charging Trump with any “legitimate” Crimes here, or is he just trying to screw over Trump’s Presidential bid?

Critique forum proves there’s no honor among Thieves, er, I mean, Lawyers