Law Office of Patrick J. Kenney

Law Office of Patrick J. Kenney
  • Firm Size 1
  • Attorney and Counselor at Law
  • Peer Reviews
    4.9/5.0 (4)
    Client Reviews
    < 50% Recommended (1)
  • Profile Visibility [ i ]
  • Update your Profile

Areas of Practice (3)

Specific Practice Area and Industry Group Details across multiple offices:

  • Criminal Law
  • Family Law
  • Personal Injury

Peer Reviews

  • 4.9/5.0 (4 reviews)
  • Legal Knowledge

    4.8/5.0
  • Analytical Capability

    5.0/5.0
  • Judgment

    5.0/5.0
  • Communication

    5.0/5.0
  • Legal Experience

    4.5/5.0
  • 5.0/5.0 Review for Patrick Jon Kenney by a Member on 10/21/14 in Criminal Defense

  • 5.0/5.0 Review for Patrick Jon Kenney by a Judge on 07/10/13 in Criminal Defense

    Mr Kenney is always prepared for his cases. His experience as a prosecutor and relationships with the current prosecutors enables him to very effectively represent his clients. He is one of our best criminal and traffic defense attorneys.

    Mr Kenney is always prepared for his cases. His experience as a prosecutor and relationships with the current prosecutors enables him to very effectively represent his clients. He is one of our best criminal and traffic defense attorneys. Read less

    Read less

See All 4 Reviews »


*Attorneys who only have peer reviews prior to April 15, 2008 are not displayed.

Client Reviews

  • 1.0/5.0 (1 review)
  • Communication

    1.0/5.0
  • Responsiveness

    1.0/5.0
  • Quality of Service

    1.0/5.0
  • Value for Money

    1.0/5.0
  • No Recommendations   1.0/5.0 Review for Patrick Jon Kenney on 01/24/13 in Family Law.

    Did not submit expenses for equitable hearing, Did not submit ANY exhibits submitted by client before equitable hearing and thus were suppressed by the opposition. Despite being asked in writing to personally address the court (client) at the equitab... Read more

    Read more

    Did not submit expenses for equitable hearing, Did not submit ANY exhibits submitted by client before equitable hearing and thus were suppressed by the opposition. Despite being asked in writing to personally address the court (client) at the equitable hearing did not do so. Did not return phone calls timely etc. Did not address incorrect schedules as requested. Read less

    Read less
Disclaimer