Lawyers.com > Find a Lawyer > Michael-J.-Raymond
Help

Michael J. RaymondLinkedIn

Michael J. Raymond 0 0 reviews - Read Reviews or Write a Review
Michael J. Raymond is a Lawyer in Phoenix, Arizona

Client Rating N/A help_info
Submit a review
Peer Rating 5.0 / 5.0
602-626-3086
View Web Site
http://www.raymondgreersassaman.com

Areas of Law

  • Insurance Coverage
  • Insurance Bad Faith

Contact Information

Currently Employed at

Raymond, Greer & Sassaman, P.C.
Member
3636 North Central Avenue, Suite 1070,
Phoenix, AZ 85012-1940
U.S.A.

Phone

602-626-3086

Phone 1

602-274-0500

Fax

602-265-7560

Email

Send email to Michael J. Raymond

Website

http://www.raymondgreersassaman.com
 

Peer Rating

av

Overall Peer Rating

5.0 out of 5.0
  • Meets very high criteria of general ethical standards
No feedback is available.
The individuals that have reviewed this lawyer have not provided any additional feedback.

Experience & Credentials

Admission Details

Admitted in 1983, Arizona

Law School Attended

Indiana University
J.D.
cum laude
Class of 1983

University Attended

University of Michigan
Class of 1980
B.A.

Birth Information

Born in September 3,1958
Owosso
Michigan

Associations & Memberships

American Bar Association (Member, Insurance Coverage Litigation Committee).

Representative Cases

Employers Mut. Cas. Co. v. DGG & CAR, Inc., 183 P.3d 513 (2008); insurer client prevails in reversing $1.6 million dollar judgment; court held 284 separate thefts by insured's employee constitutes one occurrence within meaning of $50,000 employee dishonesty policy); Cyberdyne Systems, Inc. v. Employers Mut. Cas. Co., Memorandum Decision, April 19, 2007 (successfully defended carrier against claims of breach of contract, bad faith, tortious interference with contract, conversion and civil conspiracy); Federated Service Ins. Co. v. Tires Plus, Inc., et al., September 25, 2006, Memorandum Decision, U.S.D.C., District of New Mexico (insurer client prevails as to application of first-published exclusion relative to trademark claim asserted against insured); Fireman's Fund Ins. Co. v. Lloyds, et al., Memorandum Decision, dated October 19, 2000 (affirming $4 million dollar judgment in favor of client; coverage dispute involving interplay between general and professional liability policies); Ogden v. USF&G, 188 Ariz. 132, 933 P.2d 1200 (1996); (insurer/client prevails; insured's employee not insured under commercial auto policy); Wilshire Ins. Co. v. Home Indemnity Co., 179 Ariz. 602, 880 P.2d 1148 (App. 1994) (effect of permissive user exclusion on commercial vehicles); Columbia Casualty Co. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 178 Ariz. 104, 870 P.2d 1200 (App. 1994) (dispute between primary and excess carrier over apportionment of defense costs); Employers Mutual Casualty Co. v.McKeon, 170 Ariz. 75, 821 P.2d 766 (App. 1991) (dispute between carrier and insured over prejudgment interest on first-party claim); United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Advance Roofing, 163 Ariz. 476, 788 P.2d 1227 (App. 1990) (insurer/client prevails; coverage dispute involving claim against insured for breach of construction contract).

Biographical Details

Michael J. Raymond has been recognized and selected to Arizona's Finest Lawyers. He focuses his practice on insurance coverage with special emphasis on complex property and casualty coverage matters. Since 1983 he has represented policyholders and insuranc... More
Office Information
Michael J. Raymond
3636 North Central Avenue, Suite 1070,
Phoenix, AZ 85012-1940
U.S.A.
Loading...


About Client Rating
About Peer Rating

Welcome to Martindale-Hubbell® Client Review, a new ratings service that allows you to view and provide feedback on a lawyer or law firm on service and relationship qualities such as Communication Ability, Responsiveness, Quality of Service, and Value for Money.

Determining a Rating

The Client Review Rating is determined through aggregation of validated responses. This compilation of Client Reviews translates to a numerical rating and associate descriptive term on a scale of 1 -5. 1 being lowest as "Rated" and 5 being highest as "Preeminent".

  • 4.5-5.0 Preeminent
  • 3.0-4.4 Distinguished
  • 1-2.9 Rated

Martindale-Hubbell uses a third-party resource to validate that the respondent is a living person, but cannot confirm the lawyer/client relationship, which in many cases is confidential. Clients must affirm that they are a client of the lawyer or firm identified for review at the time of the completed Client Review.

The Reviewers

Those who complete Client Reviews are clients of law firms who hired a lawyer within the last year, whose matter is not pending, and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. Reviewers can be of any type from in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners to private individuals, and even sometimes another lawyer in a different jurisdiction.

Anonymity

Client Reviews are anonymous and reviewers' identities are not published; however a summary of basic demographics will be part of the display of responses.

Why do we collect demographics as part of the review?

Those who are researching a lawyer or law firm like to see that there are other clients who might be "like them". This is valuable information contributing to the decision-making process of hiring a lawyer.

Martindale-Hubbell's role

Martindale-Hubbell facilitates the process of Client Review by gathering responses, validating them and aggregating results for display online. The content of the responses are entirely from reviewers, the clients of the firm or lawyer.

It is important to note that Martindale-Hubbell does not undertake to develop Client Reviews for all firms and lawyers. Therefore, the fact that a firm or lawyer has not been reviewed should not be construed unfavorably. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review over which Martindale-Hubbell exercises no editorial review or control.