David V. Grow

David V. Grow 0 0 reviews - Read Reviews or Write a Review
David V. Grow is a Lawyer in Downingtown, Pennsylvania

Client Rating N/A help_info
Submit a review
Peer Rating N/A help_info
610-594-1600
Free Consultation

Areas of Law

  • Medical Malpractice Law
  • Personal Injury Law

Contact Information

Currently Employed at

Wusinich & Brogan
Member
537 West Uwchlan Avenue, Suite 200,
Downingtown, PA 19335
U.S.A.

Maintains an office in more than one location.

Phone

610-594-1600

Fax

610-594-6518

Email

Send email to David V. Grow

 

Experience & Credentials

Admission Details

Admitted in 1988, Pennsylvania
1989, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania
1990, U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

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

Delaware Law School of Widener University
Class of 1987
J.D.

University Attended

University of Scranton
Class of 1952
B.S.

University of Pisa
Italy
M.D.
Class of 1958

Birth Information

Born in September 10,1931
Taylor
Pennsylvania

Languages

Italian

Associations & Memberships

Chester County and Pennsylvania Bar Associations; National Lawyers Association; Association of Trial Lawyers of America/American Association for Justice; Pennsylvania Trial Lawyers Association.

Biographical Details

Recipient, American Jurisprudence Award for: Criminal Law and Procedure; Products Liability. The Dickinson School of Law of the Pennsylvania State University Trial Advocacy Seminar and Workshop Course, 1999. Mayor, Laflin Borough, Luzerne County, 1968-1972... More

Office Information
David V. Grow
537 West Uwchlan Avenue, Suite 200,
Downingtown, PA 19335
U.S.A.
Loading...

Wusinich and Brogan
Wusinich & Brogan (Downingtown, Pennsylvania)

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.