Comments for Brown & Little, P.L.C.

Comment on No-Effort Marketing by Nancy Haynes

Nancy Haynes — Thu, 23 May 2013 11:03:12 +0000

Your thoughts have given me a lot to consider. As owner of a small ad agency, I am often asked for advice about web and SEO services. I plan to bookmark this blog entry so that I can provide it to my clients. Its focus can apply to businesses and services beyond the practice of law, certainly.

Comment on No-Effort Marketing by Matt Brown

Matt Brown — Mon, 20 May 2013 22:19:06 +0000

Thank you, lawyer internet marketing, for your insightful comment.

Comment on A Break from Blawging by » Question the quality of client leads from the Web | American Society of Legal Advocates

Mon, 20 May 2013 01:19:16 +0000

[...] month, Arizona criminal defense attorney Matt Brown noted at Tempe Criminal Defense that he was taking a break from blogging to go on a 700-plus-mile hike. But he checked into the [...]

Comment on No-Effort Marketing by lawyer internet marketing

lawyer internet marketing — Fri, 17 May 2013 20:31:57 +0000

Lawyer marketing is a good thing and is beneficial for the people also, like if someone needs a lawyer then he/she can check out from the website.

Comment on Why Do We Do It? by Crime and Punishment | What Lines?

Crime and Punishment | What Lines? — Wed, 01 May 2013 21:53:59 +0000

[...] You can also read a good discussion from an attorney in Arizona. [...]

Comment on A CPS Nightmare by talina

talina — Fri, 26 Apr 2013 11:42:14 +0000

Acctually that’s called illigal search and seasure look at this web page Google How CPS buys and sells our children.the social worker and the police officer violated you 4 the and 14 the amendment rights and your child’s that’s a law suit alot of people are suing CPA and the police for this plz check it out

Comment on Ridiculous Statute of the Day by joseph Holmes

joseph Holmes — Sat, 06 Apr 2013 15:04:23 +0000

This is not so bad! It is what is called “a notice statute” – it provides notice that any person who is employed in any capacity to manage or maintain “public land” has the authority to determine whether or not fires can be built on the property. If the person – in charge of the land, building, whatever, located on public property – determines that there is a potential fire risk they can do two things – give warning to put out the fire – or issue citation that will require the accused to offer an explanation as to why the court should not find the person guilty of “reckless conduct” by violating the risk to public land. Common sense would provide notice that the person building a fire – of any kind – in an area where the potential is that the fire could spread and cause untold problems – a cigarette for example: can cause a forest fire if it lands in dried grass or leaves. And even a bottle thrown out of a passing car can become a magnifying glass and start fires if it lands appropriately to reflect sun light on dried material. All it takes is a small spark and thousands of dollars worth of timber and other forms of property can be destroyed, as well as, the risk of loss of life affecting the fire fighters. I have no problem understanding this law any more than I have a problem understanding any other “I am in charge here and you will do as I say” rule.

Comment on The Future Former Lawyer of Lindsay Lohan by Dave

Dave — Wed, 20 Mar 2013 23:07:30 +0000

It kind of amazes me how many times she’s been in court and even late to court without much repercussions. Hopefully she can get her life together.

Comment on In Defense of Compassion by Jeff Gamso

Jeff Gamso — Sat, 16 Mar 2013 17:26:47 +0000

Lovely and right. Thanks, Matt.

Comment on Defining a Win by DeeAn GIllespie Strub

DeeAn GIllespie Strub — Fri, 15 Mar 2013 02:07:14 +0000

great comment. Looks like you are ready for another day and the challenges it may bring. We do have to pick the battles to win the war.