Help

Harry G. DeitzlerLinkedIn

Harry G. Deitzler 5.0 reviews - Read Reviews or Write a Review
Harry G. Deitzler is a Lawyer in Charleston, West Virginia

Client Rating 5.0 / 5.0
Submit a review
Peer Rating 4.4 / 5.0
866-709-9777
View Web Site
http://www.hpcbd.com

Areas of Law

  • Acquired Brain Injury
  • Automobile Accidents
  • Bad Faith Litigation
  • Bad Building Litigation
  • Big Rig Litigation
  • Brain Injury
  • Car Wreck
  • Catastrophic Injury
  • Catastrophic Property Damage
  • Class Action
  • Mass Torts
  • Contaminated Body Parts
  • Defective Construction Litigation
  • Doctor Negligence
  • Doctor Malpractice
  • Head Injury
  • Hospital Malpractice
  • Hospital Negligence
  • Inadequate Security
  • Insurance Lawsuits
  • Lawyer Negligence
  • Lawyer Malpractice
  • Major Injury Litigation
  • Medical Negligence
  • Nursing Home Litigation
  • Nursing Malpractice
  • Nursing Home Negligence
  • Nursing Negligence
  • Personal Injury Litigation
  • Pharmaceutical Negligence
  • Premises Liability
  • Products Liability Litigation
  • Professional Negligence
  • Railroad Litigation
  • Tractor Trailer Litigation
  • Workers Compensation Litigation
  • Workplace Accidents
  • Accidents
  • Animal Attacks
  • Aquatic Injuries
  • Automobile Injuries
  • Automobile Negligence
  • Bicycle Accidents
  • Boating Accidents
  • Bodily Injury
  • Carpal Tunnel Syndrome
  • Commercial Vehicle Liability
  • Cumulative Trauma
  • Dog Bites
  • Electrical Injury
  • Electromagnetic Field Litigation
  • Motor Vehicle Accidents and Injuries
  • Motorcycle Accidents
  • Neurolaw
  • Pedestrian Injuries
  • Personal Injury Appeals
  • Personal Injury Arbitration
  • Personal Injury Mediation
  • Plaintiffs Personal Injury
  • Power Line Contact Injury
  • Psychological Injury
  • Rental Vehicle Litigation
  • School Bus Accidents
  • Severe Burns
  • Sexual Abuse
  • Slip and Fall
  • Spinal Injury
  • Third Party Wrongful Death
  • TMJ Dysfunction
  • Tourist Injuries
  • Transfusion Associated AIDS
  • Unintended Acceleration
  • Whiplash
  • Wrongful Death

Contact Information

Currently Employed at

Hill, Peterson, Carper, Bee & Deitzler, P.L.L.C.
Partner
Northgate Business Park 500 Tracy Way,
Charleston, WV 25311
U.S.A.

Phone

866-709-9777

Phone 1

304-345-5667

Fax

304-345-1519

Email

Send email to Harry G. Deitzler

Website

http://www.hpcbd.com
 

Overall Client Rating

in Education Law
5.0 out of 5.0

Communication Ability
5.0
Responsiveness
5.0
Quality of Service
5.0
Value for Money
5.0

  • Data based on 1 reviews
  • Recommended by 1 Client
  • Last reviewed on 10/13/11
No feedback is available.
The individuals that have reviewed this lawyer have not provided any additional feedback.
Are you a former client? Submit a review

Experience & Credentials

Admission Details

Admitted in 1976, West Virginia
1976, U.S. District Court, Southern District of West Virginia
1989, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Law School Attended

West Virginia University Law School
Class of 1976
J.D.

University Attended

West Virginia University
Class of 1973
B.S.B.A.

Birth Information

Born in March 24,1951
South Charleston
West Virginia

Associations & Memberships

American and National Bar Associations; American Association for Justice (Sustaining Member); West Virginia Association for Justice (Board Member); Public Justice Foundation (Vice President).

Representative Transactions

Recovery for victims of C8 groundwater pollution by corporate giant Dupont in the Parkersburg, West Virginia surrounding areas. That settlement, valued in excess of $300 million, resulted in cleanup of six community water systems and the creation of the la... More

Representative Cases

State ex rel. E.I. Dupont De Nemours and Co. v. Hill, 214 W.Va. 760, 591 S.E.2d 318 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 2003; State ex rel. Dunlap v. Berger, 211 W.Va. 549, 567 S.E.2d 265 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 2002); Leach v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Co., 2002 WL 1270121 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 2002); State v. Ladd, 210 W.Va. 413, 557 S.E.2d 820 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 2001); Armor v. Lantz, 207 W.Va. 672, 535 S.E.2d 737 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 2000); McCormick v. Allstate Ins. Co., 202 W.Va. 535, 505 S.E.2d 454 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1998); Matter of Troisi, 202 W.Va. 390, 504 S.E.2d 625 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1998); State ex rel. State v. Hill, 201 W.Va. 95, 491 S.E.2d 765 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1997); McCormick v. Allstate Ins. Co., 197 W.Va. 415, 475 S.E.2d 507 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1996); McCormick v. Allstate Ins. Co., 194 W.Va. 82, 459 S.E.2d 359 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1995); Morrison v. Haynes, 192 W.Va. 303, 452 S.E.2d 394 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1994); Matter of Atkinson, 188 W.Va. 293, 423 S.E.2d 902 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1992); Ellis v. King, 184 W.Va. 227, 400 S.E.2d 235 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1990); State v. Deskins, 181 W.Va. 112, 380 S.E.2d 676 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1989); State v. Hanna, 180 W.Va. 598, 378 S.E.2d 640 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1989); State v. Dellinger, 178 W.Va. 265, 358 S.E.2d 826 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1987); State ex rel. v. M.L.N. v. Greiner, 178 W.Va. 479, 360 S.E.2d 554 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1987); State v. Bartlett, 177 W.Va. 663, 355 S.E.2d 913 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1987); State v. Hamilton, 177 W.Va. 611, 355 S.E.2d 400 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1987); Echard v. Holland, 177 W.Va. 138, 351 S.E.2d 51 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1986); State v. Barker, 176 W.Va. 553, 346 S.E.2d 344 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1986); State v. William T., 175 W.Va. 736, 338 S.E.2d 215 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1985); State v. Fitcher, 175 W.Va. 681, 337 S.E.2d 918 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1985); State v. Tennant, 173 W.Va. 627, 319 S.E.2d 395 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1984); State v. Lambert, 173 W.Va. 60, 312 S.E.2d 31 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1984); State v. Oldaker, 172 W.Va. 258, 304 S.E.2d 843 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1983); State v. Neider, 170 W.Va. 662, 295 S.E.2d 902 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1982); State v. Clark, 170 W.Va. 224, 292 S.E.2d 643 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1982); State v. Ocheltree, 170 W.Va. 68, 289 S.E.2d 742 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1982); In re Betts, 169 W.Va. 665, 289 S.E.2d 226 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1982); State v. Barker, 169 W.Va. 620, 289 S.E.2d 207 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1982); State v. Archer, 169 W.Va. 564, 289 S.E.2d 178 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1982); State v. Coulter, 169 W.Va. 526, 288 S.E.2d 819 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1982); State v. Kinney, 169 W.Va. 217, 286 S.E.2d 398 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1982); State ex rel. Farley v. Wharton, 165 W.Va. 406, 267 S.E.2d 754 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1980); Anderson v. George, 160 W.Va. 76, 233 S.E.2d 407 (W.Va.Sup.Ct. 1977); Frye v. Pitkin, 946 F.2d 885 (4th Cir. App. 1991); Tatman v.Collins, 938 F.2d 509 (4th Cir. App. 1991); Abbott v. Nichols, 905 F.2d 1528 (4th Cir. App. 1990).

Biographical Details

Named: Who's Who in American Law; Who's Who in America; Who's Who in the World. Taught and Lectured: Deposition of the Defendant's Biochemical Engineering Expert (NCA-Dallas TX); Direct and Cross Examination of the Neuropsychologist (NCA-Aspen, CO); Brain ... More
Office Information
Harry G. Deitzler
Northgate Business Park 500 Tracy Way,
Charleston, WV 25311
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.