Richard H. Sarajian

Richard H. Sarajian 0 0 reviews - Read Reviews or Write a Review
Richard H. Sarajian is a Lawyer in New City, New York

845-634-7010

Areas of Law

  • Commercial Law and Litigation
  • Real Estate Law and Litigation
  • General Litigation
  • Zoning Law

Contact Information

Currently Employed at

Montalbano, Condon & Frank, P.C.
Member
67 North Main Street, P.O. Box 1070,
New City, NY 10956-8070
U.S.A.

Phone

845-634-7010

Fax

845-634-8993

Email

Send email to Richard H. Sarajian

 

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 1976, New Jersey and U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey
1977, New York
2000, U.S. District Court, Southern and Eastern Districts of New York

Law School Attended

Albany Law School of Union University
J.D.
cum laude
Class of 1976

University Attended

Colgate University (A.B.
Class of 1973

Alumni War Memorial Scholar)

Birth Information

Born in October 25,1951
Englewood
New Jersey

Associations & Memberships

Orange County (Member, Judiciary Committee, 1983-1988), Rockland County (Member, Ethics Committee, 1990—; Chairman, 1990-1992) and New York State Bar Associations.

Biographical Details

Member, Justinian Society. Member, Albany Law Review, 1974-1975. Member, 1987-1991, 1999-2005 and Chairman, 2002-2005, National Executive Council, Armenian Apostolic Church of America. Confidential Law Clerk to the Hon. Edward M. O'Gorman, Justice of the S... More

Office Information
Richard H. Sarajian
67 North Main Street, P.O. Box 1070,
New City, NY 10956-8070
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.