Avvo Rating 10.0 top Attorney
Rated by Super Lawyers
Martindale-Hubbell Peer rated for highest level of professional excellence


Every client’s case is different. Also, a good result depends on the facts, and success depends on the difficulty of the case. Mr. Kish has been successful in many situations, some highly publicized, others not as much. Some of the cases have been large and well-known, others were smaller. Regardless of the size or publicity, each client wants the best possible result, under the circumstances. Below is a list of just some of the matters where Paul obtained a successful result for his client. When describing the case, we have only used the client’s initials, out of respect for their privacy.

Trial Court Proceedings

  • U.S. v. M.R. – prosecutors came after client and company claiming coronavirus fraud; after months of hard work convinced everyone that a plea to a strict liability misdemeanor was appropriate, client especially happy when we beat back an effort to impose a jail sentence and the Judge ultimately imposed a short period of probation.
  • U.S. v. R.S. – high-profile coronavirus fraud arrest and prosecution, resolved with a misdemeanor, short period of probation and $653 fine when, after months of hard work, we convinced prosecutors they were mostly wrong.
  • United States v. G.V. – dismissal of all federal criminal fraud charges several weeks before trial for client who had been operating Medicaid-funded health care programs.
  • United States v. P.P. – dismissal of federal extortion charges brought against client after the client had merely threatened to expose alleged perjury by his previous attorney.
  • United States v. T.T.P. – all federal criminal charges dismissed after we filed and then won a dispositive Motion to Suppress.
  • United States v. E.M. – high-ranking member of Executive Branch of U.S. government; resolved case with payment of fine and $25 court costs when prosecutor originally threatened multiple years in custody.
  • United States v. W.S. – client under investigation, arranged for cooperation and possibility of lower sentence, convinced judge to not impose any jail time even though Federal Sentencing Guidelines recommended several years’ custody.
  • United States v. G.M. – all federal medicaid fraud charges dismissed against businessman.
  • United States v. K.G. – federal charges brought against a medical doctor, accusing the physician of making verbal threats on an airplane, all charges dismissed and no adverse action against doctor’s medical licensing in multiple states.
  • United States v. P.A. – bank president charged with securities fraud was sentenced to probation for insider trading, even though the federal sentencing guidelines called for 18-24 months in custody. Sentence upheld on appeal.
  • United States v. K.D. – out-of-state businessman accused of federal kidnapping crimes arising out of consensual sexual conduct, jury found the client not guilty of all charges.
  • United States v. D.D. – truck driver hauling a rig inside of which the police found a large quantity of drugs hidden within the cargo, jury found client not guilty of all federal controlled substance charges.
  • United States v. J.E. – correctional officer accused federal civil rights violations when inmates allege sexual conduct. Jury found client not guilty of all charges.
  • United States v. F. C. R. – defense of an individual charged with federal controlled substance crimes for drugs found inside vehicle he was driving. Jury found client not guilty of all charges.
  • United States v. A.O. – businessman charged with federal immigration offenses. Judge threw out all charges at the end of the prosecution’s presentation.
  • United States v. L.W. – government employee accused of multiple instances of federal theft. Defense forced prosecution to dismiss some charges in the middle of trial. The jury finished the job, finding the client not guilty of all crimes.
  • United States v. A.L.S. – man accused of stealing and then possessing stolen truck moving in interstate commerce. Jury find him not guilty of all charges.
  • United States v. C.H. – client charged with being felon in possession of firearm. Court dismisses all charges at conclusion of prosecution’s case.
  • United States v. W.L.F – acknowledge drug dealer charged with money laundering, along with his former lawyer and bankers. Client found not guilty of all crimes, but the jury convicted the former attorney and bankers.
  • United States v. K.L. – client accused of federal arson charges arising out of retaliation in local election, found not guilty of all crimes.
  • United States v. T.S. – prison guard found not guilty of abusing inmate.
  • United States v. A.D. – all charges against client dropped at end of prosecution’s case in 6-month federal drug trial.
  • United States v. H.H-M. – client accused of leading a riot, jury acquittal on all charges.
  • Investigations where no charges were brought – many times Paul is contacted because a person or an organization is under investigation, or the prosecutor says they are getting ready to indict. The following are a few of the matters where Paul convinced them that no charges should be brought against his clients:
  • Investigation of J.D. – convinced authorities to not bring criminal charges arising out of allegations regarding improper payments.
  • Investigation of J.V. – businessman who embezzled large sum from entity not prosecuted after we worked out repayment plan.
  • United States v. B E. – investigation of real estate attorney and others, no charges brought against the lawyer even though real estate professionals indicted.
  • United States v. C.I. – investigation for income tax refund fraud, convinced prosecutors our client should merely be a witness against those principally involved in the fraud.
  • United States v. K.S. – massive multi-national fraud investigation involving billions in federal money paid to foreign company; convinced government to not charge our client who was the highest ranking company official in the United States. Company eventually pled guilty.
  • United States v. J.R. – securities fraud investigation, convinced government that no charges should be brought against client who cooperated in other investigations
  • State v. S.B. – enormous investigation into fraud involving company that provided countywide services to portion of county government, client in the middle of the scheme, convinced prosecutors to give immunity in return for client’s information.
  • State v. Q.H. – no charges against police officer involved in excessive force investigation
  • State v. M. Corporation – no charges against any of company’s employees after investigation into alleged abusive employment situation.


  • U.S. v. A. S. – took on doctor’s appeal and reversed 35 years’ of bad law.
  • United States v. R.R. – all of doctor’s convictions reversed on appeal
  • United States v. R.B. – reversal of client’s sentence on appeal.
  • United States v. L.B. – client’s sentence vacated in the United States Supreme Court; federal appellate court ordered new sentencing hearing.
  • United States v. H.B. – client’s sentence reversed and reduced.
  • United States v. T.C. – client’s sentence reversed and reduced.
  • United States v. E.F. – client’s sentence reversed.
  • United States v. G.J. – Supreme Court remand yields win.
  • United States v. S.M. – reversal of restitution order.
  • United States v. A.N. – client’s sentence reversed on appeal.
  • United States v. C.P. – client’s conviction reversed on appeal.
  • United States v. J.T. – sentence reversed and reduced.
  • State v. B.S. – reversed convictions for young accountant after he had served prison time; negotiated deal with no more jail time and resumption of career as CPA.

Client Reviews

"Amazing, Intelligent lawyer... I cannot recommend him enough". (Charges dropped)


“My hero... he succeeded where other attorneys said there was no hope... ”. (Sentence of probation)

C. N.

“... the only lawyer to hire if you’re facing federal charges-he saved me from going to prison... don’t increase your risk of prison with someone who isn’t qualified or experienced in dealing with the federal government.” (Charges dismissed shortly before trial)


“Paul not only knows the law, but his research and grasp of the particulars of our son's case was utterly impressive. He is the most professional and ethical and tenacious lawyer I have ever come across... ” (Son's convictions reversed on appeal).


Contact Us

  1. 1 Free Consultation
  2. 2 We Will Fight for You!
  3. 3 Over 36 Years Experience
Fill out the contact form or call us at (404) 207-1338 to schedule your free consultation.

Leave Us a Message