Les has represented our company for many years and has always conducted himself in an ethical and trust worthy manner. Thru his actions on our behalf, he has demonstrated that he is a knowledgeable and competent attorney. If you need someone who will represent you with passion and commitment, then Les is your man!
Review Left On 02/27/2020
Wanda Culpepper
I recently hired Les Romo to assist me in probating a will I was named executor. Les did an amazing job for me, he explained the process to me and took away the anxiety I was feeling because I had never done this before. Les walked me through the process seamlessly, I was so impressed with his work ethic I asked him to make my personal will for me. I highly recommend if you have any legal needs do not hesitate to contact Les, I know you will find his honesty and personal integrity refreshing~
Review Left On 02/27/2020
Steven Skeels
Les has done a great job with our real estate /Land transactions. He was competitively priced setting up our living trust, very attentive to details and taking care of our family’s needs.
Poor Joe seems to always come to bat for the ethically challenged and is a friend of the director in question. The land deal was done in total secret, from bogus appraisal to closing, to a sitting director, Vice President, for pennies on the dollar. To add insult to injury Mr Romo was communicating with the former director while being the attorney of record for the water utility. We finally received that communication via a PIA-public information request after having to file a formal complaint with the Attorney General for the release of the information. The members got screwed. Theres nothing laughable about that...
Les Romo was hired by our member owned water utility to defend two Texas Open Meeting Act violations where a sitting director was sold a valuable asset (land) owned by the water company, this deal was done in total secret (not put on the agenda) and sold at an extreme discount. Mr Romo told the new board he had a secret weapon however after racking up nearly $25k in legal fees (in short order) the judge ruled in favor of the plaintiff and granted summary judgement (very difficult to get) finding that the sale of land was done in violation of Texas law, thats how egregious this violation was. Mr Romo threw tantrums at meetings throwing papers across the room. He was also in contact with the former board member that was the center of the TOMA violation stating, "Looks like I won. The judge ordered that a violation occured, but it does not affect the sale of the property" because the judge didnt void the sale. To make matters worse the forensic appraisal that was commissioned by the water company, after Les Romo was let go, recently came in showing that the former director got the land at a $500k discount according to the appraisal. Mr. Romo was hired to look out for the water utility not the former director as it appeared to many. Do yourself a favor and do a criminal search for Leslie David Romo in Williamson County Judicial, its free and easy and offers insight into his anger issues.
While you are at it look at his client and peer reviews on multiple websites.
Review Left On 03/27/2019
joe gimenez
Mr. Romo successfully defended our member-owned water supply corporation.
The plaintiffs 'won' on a point that agenda items were not listed correctly. Mr. Romo could not be expected to prevail on that point of evidence which occurred years before.
However, on the plaintiff's larger petition of voiding a transaction by the corporation, Mr. Romo prevailed with TWO judges in securing "Take Nothing" rulings based on real estate law. That is what any prospective client of Mr. Romo's should know about the case -- that on matters of law he prevailed.
Also, despite the judge finding that a previous Board had in fact violated agenda prescriptions, the judge did not award attorney fees to the plaintiff. That was another victory for Mr. Romo and our water corporation. Mr. Romo is a very good attorney.
By the way, this is the same case mentioned by another reviewer -- Mister Flunker. Of course Mr. Flunker did not mention that he was a plaintiff in the case and his review is nothing more than the sour grapes of a losing party. It is also humorous that Mr. Flunker speaks about Mr. Romo's fees. Remember it is Mr. Flunker's lawsuit which forced the water supply corporation to employ Mr. Romo to defend it. Given the much larger stakes involved in the case, Mr. Romo's fees were very appropriate.
Review Left On 02/27/2018
Alma Nino
Unproffesional. Racist trash. This man is too old to be acting like a child. Would NOT trust him with ANY of my legal matters.
Review Left On 02/27/2018
Rick Dee
Racist, ultra right wing piece of trash. Take your business elsewhere
Review Left On 02/27/2016
CY Cruz
BEST FAMILY LAWYER IN THE BIZ
Review Left On 02/27/2016
Danny Bolding
I was working with Les on an adoption case. Step one was getting the case moved from one county to another.That process took about 8 months (5 months longer than Les advised it would take). After that, I have not heard from Les again. I have called, emailed and texted repeatedly and have heard nothing at all from him in 5 months now. Unless you like throwing good money money away, avoid him
Law Companies Reviews
Poor Joe seems to always come to bat for the ethically challenged and is a friend of the director in question. The land deal was done in total secret, from bogus appraisal to closing, to a sitting director, Vice President, for pennies on the dollar. To add insult to injury Mr Romo was communicating with the former director while being the attorney of record for the water utility. We finally received that communication via a PIA-public information request after having to file a formal complaint with the Attorney General for the release of the information. The members got screwed. Theres nothing laughable about that...
Les Romo was hired by our member owned water utility to defend two Texas Open Meeting Act violations where a sitting director was sold a valuable asset (land) owned by the water company, this deal was done in total secret (not put on the agenda) and sold at an extreme discount. Mr Romo told the new board he had a secret weapon however after racking up nearly $25k in legal fees (in short order) the judge ruled in favor of the plaintiff and granted summary judgement (very difficult to get) finding that the sale of land was done in violation of Texas law, thats how egregious this violation was. Mr Romo threw tantrums at meetings throwing papers across the room. He was also in contact with the former board member that was the center of the TOMA violation stating, "Looks like I won. The judge ordered that a violation occured, but it does not affect the sale of the property" because the judge didnt void the sale. To make matters worse the forensic appraisal that was commissioned by the water company, after Les Romo was let go, recently came in showing that the former director got the land at a $500k discount according to the appraisal. Mr. Romo was hired to look out for the water utility not the former director as it appeared to many. Do yourself a favor and do a criminal search for Leslie David Romo in Williamson County Judicial, its free and easy and offers insight into his anger issues.
While you are at it look at his client and peer reviews on multiple websites.
The plaintiffs 'won' on a point that agenda items were not listed correctly. Mr. Romo could not be expected to prevail on that point of evidence which occurred years before.
However, on the plaintiff's larger petition of voiding a transaction by the corporation, Mr. Romo prevailed with TWO judges in securing "Take Nothing" rulings based on real estate law. That is what any prospective client of Mr. Romo's should know about the case -- that on matters of law he prevailed.
Also, despite the judge finding that a previous Board had in fact violated agenda prescriptions, the judge did not award attorney fees to the plaintiff. That was another victory for Mr. Romo and our water corporation. Mr. Romo is a very good attorney.
By the way, this is the same case mentioned by another reviewer -- Mister Flunker. Of course Mr. Flunker did not mention that he was a plaintiff in the case and his review is nothing more than the sour grapes of a losing party. It is also humorous that Mr. Flunker speaks about Mr. Romo's fees. Remember it is Mr. Flunker's lawsuit which forced the water supply corporation to employ Mr. Romo to defend it. Given the much larger stakes involved in the case, Mr. Romo's fees were very appropriate.
Unless you like throwing good money money away, avoid him