Roger C. Malm

Roger C. Malm 0 0 reviews - Read Reviews or Write a Review
Roger C. Malm is a Lawyer in Hallock, Minnesota

1-800-962-6281
View Web Site
http://www.brinklawyers.com

Free Consultation

Areas of Law

  • Corporate Law
  • Trusts and Estates
  • Wills
  • Hospital Law
  • Real Estate
  • Guardianship and Conservatorship

Contact Information

Currently Employed at

Brink, Sobolik, Severson, Malm & Albrecht, P.A.
Member
217 South Birch Avenue, P.O. Box 790,
Hallock, MN 56728
U.S.A.

Phone

1-800-962-6281

Phone 1

1-218-843-3686

Fax

1-218-843-2724

Email

Send email to Roger C. Malm

Website

http://www.brinklawyers.com

 

Peer Rating

bv

Overall Peer Rating

4.4 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, North Dakota
1975, Arizona
1980, Minnesota

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

University of North Dakota
Class of 1974
J.D.

University Attended

St. Olaf College
Class of 1971
B.A.

Associations & Memberships

State Bar of Arizona; Minnesota State (Member, Board of Governors, 1993-1999), North Dakota State and American Bar Associations; Minnesota Defense Lawyers; Minnesota County Attorneys Association.

Biographical Details

Elected, Kittson County Attorney. Member, Judicial Selection Commission, Minnesota Supreme Court, Ninth Judicial District, January 2007.

Office Information
Roger C. Malm
217 South Birch Avenue, P.O. Box 790,
Hallock, MN 56728
U.S.A.
Loading...

Brink Sobolik Severson Malm and Albrecht P A
Brink, Sobolik, Severson, Malm & Albrecht, P.A. (Hallock, Minnesota)

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.