Office of the City Attorney Review

Fox 5 San Diego aired a press conference by the City Attorney, Ms. Mara Elliott on 3/21/18 wherein she asserted claims against the defendants in the case of Experian et al. Since Mrs. Elliott didn’t afford us an opportunity to respond to the allegations prior to her press conference, or respond to my correspondence afterwards, I am disputing certain facts presented during this airing here, to include what she DIDN’T tell you about this during her press conference, and why she suddenly took an interest in this some 6 – 8 years after the fact. | | (parody) | Knowingly withholding the fact that the same or similar suit was filed years earlier by the same attorney & her current “Co-Counsel” Tim Blood, could be construed by some as misconduct in a subsequent ethics investigation. Why was this information withheld? It’s certainly pertinent and has the appearance of collusion or harassment. | What part did the original suit play in this new one? And how can Ms. Elliott argue the defendants “hid” the matter when her own co-counsel knew about it and filed suit years ago? There are serious questions that need answered. | City sues agency accused of “hiding” massive data breach | 1. First and foremost, what Ms. Elliott didn’t disclose during her press conference was that her associate and “Co-Counsel” on this case, Mr. Tim Blood, had filed the same suit years ago in Orange County (2015), which I believe he is losing. I say the same because it stems from the same 2010 – 2012 incident and includes the same defendants and the same alleged conduct [cut and paste]. | If Ms. Elliott is going to hold a press conference that smears the names of honest, reputable companies, could she at least verify the facts first? It would be sincerely appreciated and it’s her duty as an Officer of the Court. Moreover, in the interest of justice and full disclosure, she really should have disclosed the other pending suit her friend has [Mr. Blood] regarding the same matter, and what part that played in her decision to file a duplicate suit some 6 years after the incident. Also, why do the statute of limitations laws no longer apply in San Diego? If Government Officials abuse their power, or ignore rules of law, decency, and fair play, we all need to be very concerned. | As you know, Statute of limitations laws are intended to create general practicability and fairness when filing lawsuits. It is never fair to hang an unfinished legal matter over someone’s head indefinitely. Therefore, these laws try to create a distinct end to each legal conflict so the parties involved may move on with their lives. | See: for additional details


  • Name: Office of the City Attorney
  • Country: United States
  • State: California
  • City: San Diego
  • Address: 1200 Third Ave., #1620
  • Phone: 619-236-6220
  • Website:
Share Review:
Yes it is. Based on the user review published on, it is strongly advised to avoid Office of the City Attorney Review in any dealing and transaction.
Not really. In spite of the review published here, there has been no response from Office of the City Attorney Review. Lack of accountability is a major factor in determining trust.
Because unlike, other websites get paid to remove negative reviews and replace them with fake positive ones.
Office of the City Attorney Review is rated 1 out of 5 based on the complaints submitted by our users and is marked as POOR.
Never trust websites which offer a shady ‘advocacy package’ to businesses. Search for relevant reviews on Ripoff Report and Pissed Consumer to see more unbiased reviews.
The above complaints and comments against Office of the City Attorney Review were submitted by user(s) and have been published as-is. does not edit, alter or remove content published by it’s users. There’s no amount of money a business can pay to manipulate their reviews and will NOT entertain any request to remove the review on Office of the City Attorney Review at any cost whatsoever.