Help

Robert S. WindholzLinkedIn

Robert S. Windholz reviews - Read Reviews or Write a Review
Robert S. Windholz is a Lawyer in Alpharetta, Georgia

Client Rating N/A help_info
Rating Not Shown
Submit a review
Peer Rating 5.0 / 5.0
888-335-9407
View Web Site

Free Consultation

Areas of Law

Pro Bono

  • Personal Injury
  • Automobile Accidents and Injuries
  • Truck Accidents
  • Premises Liability
  • Nursing Home Litigation
  • Medical Malpractice
  • Wrongful Death
  • Workers Compensation
  • Head and Spinal Injury
  • Brain Injury
  • Boating Accidents
  • Catastrophic Injury
  • Head Injury
  • Motor Vehicle Accidents and Injuries
  • Pedestrian Injuries
  • Personal Injury Appeals
  • Personal Injury Arbitration
  • Personal Injury Mediation
  • Plaintiffs Personal Injury
  • Psychological Injury
  • School Bus Accidents
  • Severe Burns
  • Slip and Fall
  • Spinal Injury
  • TMJ Dysfunction
  • Traumatic Brain Injury

Contact Information

Currently Employed at

Robert S. Windholz, LLC
Firm Owner
11675 Great Oaks Way, Suite 125,
Alpharetta, GA 30022
U.S.A.

Phone

888-335-9407 Call Now

Phone 1

678-990-1584

Fax

678-990-1590

Email

Send email to Robert S. Windholz

Website
Networking
 
Rating Not Shown
This lawyer has chosen not to display the rating(s) provided by his or her clients.

Experience & Credentials

Admission Details

Admitted in 1973, Georgia and U.S. District Court, Northern District of Georgia
1975, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
1981, U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

Payment Information
  • Free Initial Consultation
  • Fixed Hourly Rates
Law School Attended

Emory University
Class of 1973
J.D.

University Attended

Lafayette College

Rutgers University
Class of 1964
B.A.

Birth Information

Born in August 8,1941
Newark
New Jersey

Languages

Russian

Military

Lt., U.S. Navy, 1964-1970; Flight Officer, Naval Security Group, Vietnam Conflict; USS America CVA 66; USS Jouett DLG-29; USS Wainwright DLG-28 Defense Language Institute, Washington, DC, 1967; Aircraft Maintenance Officers School, Memphis, TN, 1965; VAW-33, NAS Quonset Point, 1965-1967; NAVCOMMSTA San Miguel, Republic Philippines, 1968-1970; Naval Aviation Training Command, Pensacola, FL, 1964-1965

Associations & Memberships

State Bar of Georgia; American Association of Justice; Georgia Trial Lawyers Association.

Representative Cases

Brooks v. Brooks, 242 Ga. 444, 249 S.E.2d 244; Brown v. Advantage Engineering, Inc., 960 F.2d 1013, 20 Media L. Rep. 1252, 11th Cir.; Crowder v. State, 237 Ga. 141, 227 S.E.2d 230; Clark v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 171 Ga.App. 554, 320 S.E.2d 380; Eid v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., 222 Ga.App. 714, 476 S.E.2d 25; Eiland v. State, 130 Ga.App. 428, 203 S.E.2d 619; Fernandez v. Fernandez, 232 Ga. 697, 208 S.E.2d 498; Floyd v. State, 135 Ga.App. 217, 217 S.E.2d 452; Fortson v. Weeks, 232 Ga. 472, 208 S.E.2d 68; Gallit v. Buckley, 240 Ga. 621, 242 S.E.2d 89; Gillem v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, 160 Ga.App. 393, 287 S.E.2d 264; Gordon v. Southeastern Fidelity Ins. Co., 182 Ga.App. 790, 357 S.E.2d 146; Grant v. State, 141 Ga.App. 272, 233 S.E.2d 249, Ga.App., Feb. 11, 1977; Harris v. Burris Chemical, Inc., 490 F.Supp. 968, N.D.Ga.; Hawkins v. Plumback, 211 Ga.App. 793, 440 S.E.2d 712; Henry v. Anderson, 164 Ga.App. 110, 296 S.E.2d 410; Hickson v. State, 138 Ga.App. 135, 226 S.E.2d 2; In re J. R. T., 233 Ga. 204, 210 S.E.2d 684; In re Robertson, 244 B.R. 880, Bankr.N.D Ga.; Johnston-Willis Hospital, Inc. v. Cain, 142 Ga.App. 305, 236 S.E.2d 374; Mazur v. Food Giant, Inc., 183 Ga.App. 453, 359 S.E.2d 178; McCloud v. State, 139 Ga.App. 369, 228 S.E.2d 389; MPI Corp. v. Northside Realty Associates, Inc., 151 Ga.App. 516, 260 S.E.2d 499; MPI Corp. v. Northside Realty Associates, Inc., 154 Ga.App. 326, 268 S.E.2d 448; Noro-North Plaza Holdings v. Rare Coins of Georgia, Inc., 196 Ga.App. 443, 395 S.E.2d 918; Northside Realty Associates, Inc. v. MPI Corp., 245 Ga. 321, 265 S.E.2d 11; Reed v. State, 134 Ga.App. 47, 213 S.E.2d 147; Richfield Capital Corp. v. Federal Signal Corp., 222 Ga.App. 757, 476 S.E.2d 26; Robeson v. International Indem. Co., 248 Ga. 306, 282 S.E.2d 896; Robinson v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., 158 Ga.App. 22, 279 S.E.2d 291; Roby v. Kroger Co., 219 Ga.App. 459, 465 S.E.2d 496; Rosemond v. Prudential Property & Cas. Ins. Co., 170 Ga.App. 189, 316 S.E.2d 541; Salome v. First Nat. Bank of Atlanta, 162 Ga.App. 394, 291 S.E.2d 452; State Farm Fire & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Terry, 230 Ga.App. 12, 495 S.E.2d 66, 97 FCDR 4490; Steele v. Rosehaven Chapel, Inc., 223 Ga.App. 523, 478 S.E.2d 596, 96 FCDR 3810; Steele v. Rosehaven Chapel, Inc., 233 Ga.App. 853, 505 S.E.2d 245, 98 FCDR 2955; Terry v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., 269 Ga. 777, 504 S.E.2d 194, 98 FCDR 3168; U.S. v. Williams, 613 F.2d 560, 5th Cir.; U.S. v. Carter, 526 F.2d 1276, 5th Cir.; Usher v. Usher, 442 F.Supp. 866, N.D.Ga.; Ward v. U.S., 694 F.2d 654, 11th Cir. (Fla.); Wood v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 244 Ga.App. 187, 534 S.E.2d 556, 00 FCDR 2432.
Office Information
Robert S. Windholz
11675 Great Oaks Way, Suite 125,
Alpharetta, GA 30022
U.S.A.
Loading...

Robert S Windholz LLC
Robert S. Windholz, LLC (Alpharetta, Georgia)

Video
Play Law Firm Video
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.