Help

J. Michael ConleyLinkedIn

J. Michael Conley 0 0 reviews - Read Reviews or Write a Review
J. Michael Conley is a Lawyer in Bath, Maine

Client Rating N/A help_info
Submit a review
Peer Rating 5.0 / 5.0
888-328-1057
View Web Site

Free Consultation | Credit Cards Accepted

Areas of Law

  • Personal Injury
  • Medical Malpractice
  • Products Liability
  • Premises Liability
  • Torts
  • Insurance
  • Corporate Law
  • Alternative Dispute Resolution

Contact Information

Currently Employed at

Conley & Wirick, P.A.
Member
30 Front Street, Suite 2,
Bath, ME 04530-2600
U.S.A.

Phone

888-328-1057 Call Now

Phone 1

207-443-3434

Fax

207-443-3849

Email

Send email to J. Michael Conley

Website
 

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 1970, Maine and U.S. District Court, District of Maine
U.S Court of Appeals, First Circuit

Payment Information
  • Accepts Visa and MasterCard
  • Free Initial Consultation
  • Fixed Hourly Rates
  • Fixed Fees Available
Law School Attended

University of Maine
Class of 1970
J.D.

University Attended

Phillips Exeter Academy
Class of 1963

University of Vermont
Class of 1967
B.A.

Birth Information

Born in August 31,1944
Bath
Maine

Associations & Memberships

Sagadahoc County, Maine State and American Bar Associations; Maine Trial Lawyers Association; The Association of Trial Lawyers of America; Attorneys Information Exchange Group.

Representative Cases

Foremost Ins. Co. v. Levesque, _A.2d_ (Me. 2005); Leonard v. Precast, 686 A.2d 1079 (Me., 1996); Williams v. Inverness Corp., 664 A.2d 1244 (ME., 1995); Musk v. Nelson, 647 A.2d 1198 (Me., 1994); Leonard v. Precast 686 A.2d 1079 (ME., 1996); Hewitt v. Bauhmuller584 A.2d 644 (ME., 1991); Mutual Fire Ins. Co. v. Richardson, 640 A.2d 205 (Me., 1994); Brouillard v. Allen, 619 A.2d 988 (Me., 1993); Douglass v. Kenyon Oil Co., Inc., 618 A.2d 220 (Me., 1992); Hart v. County of Sagadahoc, 609 A.2d 282 (Me., 1992); Langer v. U.S. Fidelity & Guar. Co., 552 A.2d 20 (Me., 1988); Dodge v. Dodge, 435 A.2d 407 (Me., 1981); State v. Carey, 412 A.2d 1218 (Me., 1980); State v. Koehling, 381 A.2d 12 (Me., 1978); Maine Real Estate Commission v. Kelby, 360 A.2d 528 (Me. 1976); State v. MacNamara, 345 A.2d 509 (Me., 1975); State v. Atkinson, 325 A.2d 44 (Me., 1974); State v. Sondergaard, 316 A.2d 367 (Me., 1974); Pinkham v. State, 294 A.2d 441 (Me., 1972).

Biographical Details

Member, Maine Law Review, 1969-1970. Author: "Property Tax and the Impoverished," Maine Law Review, Spring, 1970. Lectures: ATLA Convention Seminars: AIG Seminar, Re: Motor Vehicle Restraint Systems; Winter Seminar, Re: Laparoscopic Surgery; MTLA Seminars ... More
Office Information
J. Michael Conley
30 Front Street, Suite 2,
Bath, ME 04530-2600
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.