Loftin & Masri, APC
Verified5.0 (2 reviews)
Hillsboro, OR
Immigration
View Profile
(971) 317-0245
Stockton Grant D
VerifiedCivil Litigation Lawyer
139 NE Lincoln St, Hillsboro, OR 97124, United States
Information last updated
Practice Areas
About Stockton Grant D
Stockton Grant D is a Attorney located at 139 NE Lincoln St, Hillsboro, OR 97124 Phone Number: (503) 648-6677 HOURS OF OPERATION Day Hours Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday MORE INFO
Details & Amenities
Accessibility
Wheelchair-accessible car parkWheelchair-accessible entranceWheelchair-accessible toilet
Stockton Grant D — Frequently Asked Questions
Where is Stockton Grant D located?+
Stockton Grant D is located at 139 NE Lincoln St, Hillsboro, OR 97124, United States. Use the "Get Directions" link on this page to navigate there.
What kind of cases does Stockton Grant D handle?+
Stockton Grant D handles Civil Litigation. Confirm that they cover your specific legal matter during your first consultation.
How do I contact Stockton Grant D?+
Call Stockton Grant D at +1 503-648-6677. Many firms offer a free or low-cost initial consultation.
Is Stockton Grant D well rated?+
Stockton Grant D has a 3.7-star rating based on 3 Google reviews. Ratings are sourced from Google and shown for reference.
Client Reviews
3 reviews- Mary Moshofsky· via Google
I maybe only walked by. This is not a service i need right now.
8 years ago - Paulette Hugulet, DC· via Google
Attorney Stockton is an upstanding lawyer who is excellent in communication, interpersonal skills, and analytical skills. If I could give him 10 starts I would! Highly recommend his services.
2 years ago - PDX Hair Extensions· via Google
Factual Warning to Consumers & Litigants: Beware of Deliberate Discovery Suppression and Unethical Tactics If you are considering hiring Brisbee & Stockton LLC, or if you are an opposing party facing Michael C. Padden (formerly Michael P. Clardy), you must be prepared for extreme litigation gamesmanship that borders on severe ethical violations. In Washington County Case No. 25CV20679, Mr. Padden and his firm engaged in a documented pattern of discovery suppression and misrepresentation: 1 False Representations to the Court: At a formal hearing on March 12, 2026, Mr. Padden explicitly represented to Judge Menchaca that discovery was complete and all records had been produced. In reality, his client, property owner Juan Xu, had produced zero pages of discovery. 2 Suppression of Toxic Radon & Plumbing Evidence: Mr. Padden actively withheld critical inspection and repair records. We were forced to independently subpoena third-party companies (Alpha Environmental and Rescue Rooter) to uncover toxic radon reports (showing 7.0 pCi/L, nearly double the EPA action limit) and major plumbing failures. 3 The "Authentication Trap": After we obtained the suppressed documents via subpoena, Padden objected to them as "unauthenticated" and inadmissible. He then systematically blocked and unilaterally cancelled the depositions needed to authenticate them, subsequently moving for summary judgment because we lacked "admissible" evidence. 4 Fabricated Declarations: On April 29, 2026, Padden unilaterally cancelled depositions of his witnesses via email ("I am instructing my witnesses they do not need to be available"). Yet, on May 7, 2026, he filed a formal Declaration under penalty of perjury falsely claiming that we had postponed them. 5 Attorney Shifting Tactics: The firm utilized shifty attorney-of-record transitions (Clardy going on "paternity leave," Stockton/Burns making broken promises of production, and Clardy returning under the name Padden without notice) to delay proceedi
3 months ago
