Daniel Warner & Aaron Kelly Placed On Probation For Fraudulent Activity.
More Fraud Claims & FAKE Lawsuits Surface After Plea Bargain.
“The allegations in the complaint are troubling and raise multiple concerns” stated the bar in the plea bargain. Fake notarization's non-existent defendants across multiple cases; forged signatures…indeed, very disturbing to say the least.
Arizona: Attys Daniel Warner and Aaron Kelly of Kelly/Warner Law Agree to “Plea Deal” Imposing 2-Year Probation for Fraudulent Lawsuits Involving “Fake” Defendants and Notaries
The State Bar of Arizona (SBA) and the ethically challenged attorneys Daniel Warner and Aaron Kelly of the Scottsdale located Kelly/Warner Law firm have reached a settlement – otherwise known as a “plea deal.” The penalty agreed upon is a two-year probation period for both attorneys for a pattern of conduct that was deemed serious ethical violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct. The SBA had engaged in an extensive year and a half investigation into a complaint originally submitted by respected UCLA legal professor Eugene Volokh that detailed a number of alleged fraudulent lawsuits filed by Kelly/Warner as part of their online reputation repair services. Professor Volokh also authored a piece for his legal blog for The Washington Post. The scheme involved the filing of lawsuits claiming defamatory content online directed against Kelly/Warner Law clients. The issue that would be investigated and ultimately result in the disciplinary repercussions was the knowingly naming “fake” defendants and/or plaintiffs that had nothing to do with the objectionable content being disseminated online. To further advance the nefarious nature of these fraudulent lawsuits was the use of non-existent notaries and official seals forged to validate court filings as having parties properly verified.
How the scheme worked was by filing fraudulently prepared lawsuits naming non-existent and/or “fake” litigants, the parties whom may have actually authored and posted the targeted online content would not be made aware that there even existed a legal challenge to said content being litigated in the judicial system. The net result would be due to unchallenged allegations; the presiding judge would issue Court Orders declaring default judgments or approve submitted agreements of parties validated with “forged” notary seals. With an official Court Order having been rendered declaring the identified content as “defamatory,” the next stage involved demands that the content be removed from websites and/or Google to deindex. The deindexing of the content would effectively make it not findable via your standard online search results. Thus the client achieving the desired result of “online reputation repair” for the Kelly/Warner Law efforts by having (factual) derogatory information removed from Internet discovery.
What is important to note is the admissions of both attorneys Daniel Warner and Aaron Kelley that they had engaged in violations of their professional duty to conduct their legal practice in an unethical manner was truly egregious. They willfully did not abide by the requirements of the legal profession. What is an unfortunate fact is the reality of the State Bar of Arizona without dispute is the most lenient bar association in the entire country. It can be easily surmised that the conduct identified to have been perpetrated by attorneys Daniel Warner and Aaron Kelly would have resulted in DISBARMENT; at the very least lengthy SUSPENSIONS issued by the vast majority of state bar associations.
It is important to clearly articulate what exactly was executed as a legal strategy to circumvent the dominion of the judicial system. Attorneys Daniel Warner and Aaron Kelly actively marketed an online reputation repair services claiming Internet law expertise which involved utilizing and taking advantage of the civil litigation procedures that they were well versed in its processes. Simply stated – they “gamed” the judicial system. What is important is such devious manipulation of one of most important institutions as the judicial system should NOT be so easily executed circumventing all legal protection to the unaware victims of the scam – making a mockery of the very basis of the “rule of law” doctrine. It is hard to imagine that a non-lawyer civilian conducting such a brazen fraud upon the courts would not be met with CRIMINAL CHARGES. An alarming realization of the Kelly/Warner legal manipulation scheme is both the simplicity and the likelihood of success. Not only should have attorneys Daniel Warner and Aaron Kelly been levied permanent DISBARMENT, there should have been criminal charges liability for committing willful FRAUD.
THE KELLY/WARNER ONLINE REPUTAION REPAIR LEGAL SCAM PROCESS PRESENTED CHRONILOGICALLY TO ITS CONCLUSION AND IMPLEMENTATION
It was NOT a surprise that Daniel Warner and Aaron Kelly would eventually be exposed engaging in fraudulent activities in filing completely false and fabricated lawsuits. Simply put – it was a total scam based on “reputation repair” services promising to remove negative content being disseminating online that can greatly affect a person’s personal or business affairs. This has become a burgeoning legal business as negative reviews being discovered on the Internet can destroy a reputation and/or business overnight. The Kelly/Warner Law angle to charge clients enormous legal fees was to file completelyFAKE lawsuits against non-existent people. Here is how their scam worked:
A) Bad and/or negative posting are easily found online on such websites as RipOffReport.com (ROR). The website ROR being one that does NOT remove postings even when the party that made the posting requests them to do so. They don’t care. It can be quite a task to get postings to go away.
B) What do you do? The Kelly/Warner Law answer was to sue… someone…anyone…. Actually, no one. It really didn’t matter as the strategy was to proceed through the litigation process anonymously with ZERO transparency.
C) The foundation and basic premise of this strategy is based on the fact lawsuits can be very time consuming and costly. Plus, there is no assurance you will prevail. This is especially true when the original party who posted the negative comments is steadfast in defending their right to express their opinions. This right strongly protected by the Constitution and the First Amendment, the Right to Freedom of Speech. They are justified in expressing their honest opinion in whatever postings they may choose to author. It can be VERY difficult to win this type of lawsuit.
D) The Kelly/Warner Law solution (Scam) was to sue someone that doesn’t exist. In this way there is no one to object to the claims of the lawsuit and a victory by default is likely assured.
E) The Kelly/Warner Law (Scam) also had an advanced scheme to move this strategy along even more efficiently as the judicial process can still move forward at a seemingly glazier pace. Kelly/Warner Law’s twist was to create a fake Defendant to “accept” a settlement for the lawsuit that presented to the courts an AGREE to an injunction that labels targeted content libelous. This “settlement” will move quickly through the judicial system as it appeared to the Court that the parties were in agreement. There was no obvious reason for pushback by the Court to clear cases off its docket when it APPEARED the parties were in agreement resolving the matter without further litigation. Apparently a win- win-win scenario for all – including the Court.
F) In order to make the case move forward with this type of court filings it sometimes required the named parties, Plaintiffs and/or Defendants, to sign court documents and the signature required verification by a notary. That was cause for a problem when you were dealing with people who do not exist. The Warner solution; have the fake tools to create forged notary stamps for non-existent notaries. Why not? Fake Defendants – sometimes fake Plaintiffs - why not a fake notary?
G) With all the legal paper work appearing to be properly in place, a Judge would naturally sign off on the “agreement” that was an Injunction that identified the links to the content being targeted for removal. A Court ORDER was issued identifying the content as libelous and subject to removal.
H) The websites hosting the content targeted may or may not honor the Court’s ORDER; it depends on a wide range of legal issues and many specifics variables associated with the websites involved.
I) However, it did not really matter what a website did in the end, the objective was always to get the Court ORDER to present to Google. With the Court Order, Google would be contacted toDEINDEX the content and thus in reality, makes it virtually impossible for the targeted content to be found as a search result. It was still there on the Internet, but the likelihood that this content would be found by anyone searching for results was so miniscule that it effectively can be said it had vanished (the number associated with a link being clicked when it does not appear in the first 5 pages of Google search results is in the ONE in MILLIONS). There you go – the Kelly/Warner Law online reputation repair stratagem.
J) NOTE AT THIS POINT: The fact is the party who had posted the content in question would be completely unaware that such legal maneuvers had even occurred in some unknown courtroom.
This scheme perpetrated by attorneys Daniel Warner and Aaron Kelly as the main business practice as a law firm specializing in Internet Law was a complete mockery of the judicial system. The only outcome such nefarious fraudulent unethical conduct by licensed attorneys warranted was the DISBARMENT of such unethical lawyers. It is ONLY due to the Kelly/Warner Law firm operating under the governance of the State Bar of Arizona authority that resulted in such a lenient disciplinary conclusion of 2-year probation. One has to speculate if that was known and part of the business strategy for the legal practice from the start.
Original Charges Filed By The Arizona State Bardan-warner-supreme-court-Complaint