Lawyers.com > Find a Lawyer > Charles-E.-Moore

Help

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Email To A Friend

Charles E. Moore

Charles E. Moore is a Lawyer in Owensboro, Kentucky

Client Rating N/A help_info

Submit a review

Peer Rating 5.0 / 5.0

270-683-4513

http://www.cemoorelaw.com

View Website

Areas of Law

Civil Litigation
Products Liability
Motor Vehicle Wrecks
Personal Injury

Admiralty and Maritime Law
Medical Malpractice
Wrongful Death

Contact Information

Currently Employed at

Moore, Malone & Safreed
Managing Partner
104 East Fourth Street, P.O. Box 549,
Owensboro, KY 42302-0549
U.S.A.

Phone

270-683-4513

Fax

270-683-4565

Website

http://www.cemoorelaw.com

Peer Rating

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 1974, Kentucky, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth and Eighth Circuits and U.S. Supreme Court

Law School Attended

Louis D. Brandeis School of Law
University of Louisville

J.D.
Class of 1974

University Attended

Transylvania University and Pikeville College
Class of 1971
B.S.

Birth Information

Born in August 29,1948
Shelby Gap
Kentucky

Special Agencies

Judicial Form Retirement System, Board of Trustees, Investment Committee Chairman 2000; Kentucky Supreme Court Chief Justice's Jury Study Commission (2001-2002); Murray State University Regional Stewardship and Outreach Advisory Council, 2007; Northwest Kentucky Forward Board of Directors 2005; Judicial Nominating Commission for 5th Judicial Circuit/District (2005); Merit Selection Panel (reappointment of Magistrate Judge) for U.S. District Court (2005); Delegate to the Democratic National Convention (2000); Union County Economic Development Committee, Board of Directors 2000 ; River Park Center Foundation Board of Trustees (1998-2006); Magistrate Judge Merit Selection Panel for the U.S. District Court (1998); Honorary member of the Board of Directors of the Owensboro Museum of Fine Art (2006).

Associations & Memberships

Daviess County (President, 2000), Kentucky (Board of Governors, 2001-2006) and American Bar Associations; Kentucky Justice Association (formerly Kentucky Academy of Trial Attorneys) (Treasurer, 2000, Secretary, 2001, Vice President, 2002, President-Elect, 2003, President, 2004); American Association of Justice (formerly The Association of Trial Lawyers of America). Certified as a Civil Trial Advocate by the National Board of Trial Advocacy, 1982. American Board of Trial Advocates, Advocate, 1990 (President, Kentucky Chapter, 1994).

Representative Cases

Adkins v. Adkins, Ky.App., 574 S.W.2d 898, 1978; Riverside Ins. Co. v. McDowell, Ky.App., 576 S.W.2d 268, 1979; Woosnam v. Woosnam, Ky.App., 587 S.W.2d 262, 1979; Lomayestewa v. Our Lady of Mercy Hospital, Ky., 589 S.W.2d 885, 1979; Green River District Health Department v. Wigginton, Ky., 764 S.W.2d 475, 1989; Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Taylor, 172 S.W.3d 786, (KY 2005).

Biographical Details

Recipient: Distinguished Alumni Award, University of Louisville Louis D. Brandeis School of Law, 2003; Peter Perlman Outstanding Trial Lawyers Award, Kentucky Academy of Trial Attorneys, 2005. Listed in The Best Lawyers in America, Personal Inju... More

Recipient: Distinguished Alumni Award, University of Louisville Louis D. Brandeis School of Law, 2003; Peter Perlman Outstanding Trial Lawyers Award, Kentucky Academy of Trial Attorneys, 2005. Listed in The Best Lawyers in America, Personal Injury Lawyers Category, 2002-2007. Author: "Punitive Damages In Wrongful Death Actions: Is KRS 411.184 Constitutional?" Vol. 54, No. 3, Kentucky Bench and Bar, Summer 1990. Lecturer: "Voir Dire, Damages, Closing Arguments," Kentucky Bar Association Annual Meeting, 1985; "Trial Advocacy," Annual Intensive Course Instructor, University of Kentucky, 1986; "Preparing Your Doctor Witness," Kentucky Academy of Trial Attorneys, 1989; "Opening Statements," Kentucky Bar Association Annual Meeting, 1990; "Plaintiff and Wife: Loss of Consortium," Kentucky Academy of Trial Attorneys, Evidence Seminar, 1991; "Ethics of Witness Preparation and Management," Kentucky Bar Association Midyear Convention, NYC, December 1992; "Practical Considerations of Trying the Civil Case: Plan of Action, Lining Up Witnesses and Checking Out Your Jury," Kentucky Bar Association Practical Skills Institute, 1992; "Predictive Hazard Analysis," Kentucky Academy of Trial Attorneys, Products Liability Seminar, 1993; "Structured Settlements," Kentucky Academy of Trial Attorneys, Spring Break Seminar, 1993; "Automobile Accidents," Kentucky Academy of Trial Attorneys, Spring Break Seminar, 1994; "Products Liability," Kentucky Academy of Trial Attorneys, Spring Break Seminar, 1995; "Beyond the Rules: Traditions of Professionalism and Civility," Kentucky Bar Association Annual Meeting, 1998; "The Attorney's Duty to the Court: Rules & Relationships," Kentucky Bar Association New Lawyers Program, 1999; "Systematic Approach to Case Preparation," Kentucky Academy of Trial Attorneys, Major Trial Practice Seminar, 1999; "Daubert/Rule 35 & Dealing the IMEs," Kentucky Academy of Trial Attorneys, On-Line Seminar, 2001; "The Use of Grief Experts," Kentucky Academy of Trial Attorneys, Maximizing Recovery for Your Client Seminar, 2001; "The Chief Justice's Jury Summit," Kentucky Bar Association Annual Convention, June 2001; "Witnesses: They're Pretty Important, But What Can You Do?", Kentucky Academy of Trial Attorneys Trial Tips From The Masters, 2001; "Case Selection: Separating the Wheat from the Chaff," Kentucky Academy of Trial Attorneys All Stars: Master of Trial Advocacy, June 2002; "Tort Reform & Medical Malpractice; Is There a Crisis in the Courts?" Ohio Northern University, February 2, 2005: Tort Reform v. The Civil Jury Tort System; Kentucky Supreme Court Special Judge, May 1991, Osborne v. Pepsi-Cola, Ky., 816 S.W.2d 643 (1991); Uninsured Employers' Fund v. Brewster, Ky., 818 S.W.2d 602 (1991); Civil Trial Practice, Process, Venue and Jurisdiction, Instructions and Appellate Practice, Kentucky District Bar Meeting, 1984; Voir Dire, Damages Closing Arguments, Kentucky Bar Association Annual Meeting, 1985. Fellow: American College of Trial Lawyers, 1996 (Chair, Kentucky State Committee, 2003- 2005). (Board Certified Civil Trial Advocacy Specialist by the National Board of Trial Advocacy) Less

Office Information

Charles E. Moore

Moore, Malone & Safreed

104 East Fourth Street, P.O. Box 549,
Owensboro, KY 42302-0549
U.S.A.

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.

An explanation of the Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings

A Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rating reflects a combination of achieving a Very High General Ethical Standards rating and a Legal Ability numerical rating.

General Ethical Standards Rating

The General Ethical Standards rating denotes adherence to professional standards of conduct and ethics, reliability, diligence and other criteria relevant to the discharge of professional responsibilities.

Those lawyers who meet the "Very High" criteria of General Ethical Standards can proceed to the next step in the ratings process.

Legal Ability Ratings

For lawyers rated with the changed methodology, Legal Ability ratings will now indicate professional ability within a specific area of practice. Legal Ability ratings are based on performance in five key areas, rated on a scale of 1 to 5 (with 1 being the lowest and 5 being the highest). These areas are:
Legal Knowledge - Lawyer's familiarity with the laws governing his/her specific area of practice(s)
Analytical Capabilities - Lawyer's creativity in analyzing legal issues and applying technical knowledge
Judgment - Lawyer's demonstration of the salient factors that drive the outcome of a given case or issue.
Communication Ability - Lawyer's capability to communicate persuasively and credibly
Legal Experience - Lawyer's degree of experience in his/her specific area of practice(s)

Additional Feedback

The changed Peer Review Ratings allow reviewers to provide optional Additional Feedback on the lawyer under review. Additional Feedback is displayed anonymously in conjunction with the review results to the lawyer under review. LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell reserves the right not to display any feedback.

Reviewer Demographics

Peer Review Ratings are anonymous and reviewers' identities are not published, but in an effort to provide more details to the users of Peer Review Ratings, LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell will aggregate reviewers' basic demographics, including general position and general geographic location, which may be published with the ratings display on martindale.com® and Lawyers.comsm. Examples of basic demographics are "private practice lawyer, senior partner, New York, USA."

The Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rating

After a lawyer's General Ethical Standards and Legal Ability Ratings are confirmed, his/her ratings are aggregated to create an overall numeric rating for each rated Area of Practice. The numeric rating determines the Peer Review Rating, which includes a rating term and may include a Certification Mark:

AV® Preeminent™ (4.5 - 5.0) - An AV® certification mark is a significant rating accomplishment - a testament to the fact that a lawyer's peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence.

BV® Distinguished™ (3.0 - 4.4) - The BV® certification mark is an excellent rating for a lawyer with some experience. A widely respected mark of achievement, it differentiates a lawyer from his or her competition.

Rated (1.0 - 2.9) - The Peer Review Rated designation demonstrates that the lawyer has met the very high criteria of General Ethical Standing.

For lawyers rated in the existing program, the display will appear differently than those reviewed in the changed methodology. Because the lawyers converted to the new display have yet to be re-reviewed in the changed system, there will not be the depth of detail available on their Legal Ability Rating, Area of Practice specificity, Additional Feedback or Reviewer's Demographic data.

The Reviewers and Anonymity

The reviewers are members of the Bar and Judiciary (lawyers and judges) across multiple jurisdictions and geographic locations and are listed on martindale.com. They are from similar areas of practice and/or industry as the lawyer being rated, who know or have worked with the lawyer under review and are able to rate them on their professional ethical standards and legal ability. All Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings review materials are treated as anonymous. LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell takes steps to protect your anonymity (e.g., not associating reviewer names with their responses and aggregating their responses with responses from other reviewers before sharing or publishing them). But it is possible that their responses may contain sufficient information to allow the rated lawyer to ascertain their identity.

Facilitating the Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings Process

LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell facilitates the peer review process by gathering responses, validating them and aggregating results for display online. The content of the responses are entirely from reviewers, the peers of the lawyer. Peer reviewers must affirm that they are a peer of the lawyer identified for review. A peer can submit only one review for a specific lawyer within a 12-month period.

A lawyer's rating will generally improve over time. But LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review ratings can be revised downward, or even removed if a decline is noted in ability or ethical standards. While LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell makes available the option of regular rating reviews for the lawyers, the most recent results are relied upon when determining the final rating.

It is important to note that because LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell does not undertake to develop Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings for all lawyers, the fact that a lawyer is not rated should not be construed unfavorably. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review responses displayed in whole or in part by LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell. LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell may use your responses in whole or in part in accordance with the Terms and Conditions, but it is not required to do so. LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell reserves the right, in its sole, unrestricted discretion, not to publish or otherwise use all or any portion of any responses or submissions it may receive.

No subscription or listing on martindale.com or lawyers.com is ever solicited or accepted on the promise of publication of a particular Peer Review Rating. No preferential consideration is ever given to any lawyer or law firm. There is never any payment made to lawyers and judges who participate in rating reviews. The process is a cooperative service with the Bar and the Judiciary.

It is LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell policy to conduct regular random periodic reviews of all Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings to insure their accuracy. Where supporting opinions dictate, appropriate action (such as deleting, raising or lowering a rating) is taken.

Disbarred or suspended lawyers automatically have their LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings removed as soon as notified by a state Bar. Other types of lawyer disciplinary actions administered by the appropriate Bar or judicial authorities may also be grounds to remove a rating. While Bar admitting authorities supply LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell with disciplinary information, LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell also reserves the right to investigate information developed from the Bar or the judiciary regarding rated lawyers that have occurred that may impact the ethical standards of a rated lawyer.

Charles E. Moore

Areas of Law

Contact Information

Peer Rating

Overall Peer Rating

Experience & Credentials

Site Resources

Regional Sites

LexisNexis Resources

Connect with Us