MARTINDALE-HUBBELL CONGRATULATES OUR NEW AV PREEMINENT PEER RATED ATTORNEYS 9/18/17
Martindale-Hubbell is proud to announce that the following attorneys have achieved a Martindale-Hubbell AV Preeminent Peer Review Rating, awarded to only those lawyers with the highest ethical standards and professional ability.
- Bilal Ahmed Faruqui
- Casey Dale Younger of Wilkins Patterson Smith Pumphrey & Doty
- Clement Jay Robbins of C. Jay Robbins, IV P.C.
- Courtney A. Story of Story Law
- Darlene Sue Simmons
- Dazi S. Lenoir of Lyons & Lenoir, LLC
- Don Niesen of Niesen Price Worthy Campo, P.A.
- Jackson Wolfe Adams of Wooten Kimbrough, P.A.
- Jeffrey A. Shor of Martin Clearwater & Bell LLP
- Julie McGhee Howard of NowackHoward
- Kenneth M. High of Lowthorp, Richards, McMillan, Miller & Templeman, APC
- Kenneth Martin Perry of Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP
- Kris Zeppenfeld of Kravitz, Schnitzer & Johnson, Chtd.
- Randy Bryan Ligh of Randy B. Ligh
- Richard J. Crouch of Vandeventer Black LLP
- Timothy A. Stratton of Gust Rosenfeld P.L.C.
Only approximately 10% of attorneys have achieved this prestigious honor. For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings, visit our Ratings and Reviews page. Attorneys who are interested in starting their own peer review process can submit the form below to contact our Ratings Team directly.
Martindale-Hubbell conducts secure online Peer Review Ratings surveys of lawyers across multiple jurisdictions and geographic locations, in similar areas of practice as the lawyer being rated. Reviewers are instructed to assess their colleagues’ general ethical standards and legal ability in a specific area of practice.
The ratings help buyers of legal services identify, evaluate and select the most appropriate lawyer for a specific task at hand. The confidentiality, objectivity and complete independence of the ratings process are what have made the program a unique and credible evaluation tool for members of the legal profession. The legal community values the accuracy of lawyer peer review ratings because they are determined by their peers – the people who are best suited to assess the legal ability and professional ethics of their colleagues.