James W. Hart

James W. Hart 0 0 reviews - Read Reviews or Write a Review
James W. Hart is a Lawyer in Sandusky, Ohio

419-625-8324
View Web Site
http://www.flynnpykruse.com

Areas of Law

  • Insurance Defense
  • Personal Injury Law
  • Criminal Law
  • Family Law
  • Will Contests
  • Civil Trial Practice

Contact Information

Currently Employed at

Flynn, Py & Kruse A Legal Professional Association
Shareholder
165 East Washington Row,
Sandusky, OH 44870
U.S.A.

Phone

419-625-8324

Fax

419-625-9007

Email

Send email to James W. Hart

Website

http://www.flynnpykruse.com

 

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 1980, Texas
1981, Ohio
1992, U.S. Supreme Court

Payment Information
  • Fixed Fees Available
Law School Attended

St. Mary's University of San Antonio
Class of 1980
J.D.

University Attended

Ohio Wesleyan University
Class of 1973
B.A.

University of Cincinnati
Class of 1975
M.A.

Birth Information

Born in September 19,1951
Cleveland
Ohio

Associations & Memberships

Erie County and Ohio State Bar Associations; State Bar of Texas; Defense Research Institute; Ohio Association of Civil Trial Attorneys; Ohio Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

Representative Cases

Supreme Court Cases Only: Cicco v. Stockmaster (2000), 89 Ohio 3d 95; Moore v. State Auto Mutual Insurance Co. (2000), 88 Ohio 3d 27; Peace v. Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance Co. (1993), 68 Ohio 3d 106.

Biographical Details

Phi Delta Phi.

Office Information
James W. Hart
165 East Washington Row,
Sandusky, OH 44870
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.