Edward I. EilandLinkedIn

Edward I. Eiland 0 0 reviews - Read Reviews or Write a Review
Edward I. Eiland is a Law Firm in Logan, West Virginia
304-752-2275

About This Firm

Attorney at Law

Edward Israel Eiland first opened his office as a solo practitioner on November 16, 1946, after his graduation from law school following service with the United States Marine Corps in World War II. The firm is engaged in a diversified general practice, with an emphasis on real estate and probate.

Areas of Law

  • Real Estate
  • Probate
  • and General Civil Practice.
  • Corporate and Business Matters
  • Administrative Practice

Contact Information

Firm Address

Edward I. Eiland
200 Bank One Building 229 Stratton Street, P.O. Box 899,
Logan, WV 25601
U.S.A.

Phone

304-752-2275

Fax

304-752-2281

Email

Send email to Edward I. Eiland

People at This Firm

Lawyer Name:
Area of Law:
Loading...
 

Peer Rating

Rated

Average Peer Rating

Based on this firm's rated lawyers
5.0 out of 5.0
  • Lawyers rated at this firm meet very high criteria of general ethical standards
Edward I. Eiland
Attorney
5.0 out of 5.0

Firm Details

Year Established

1946

Firm Size

1

Payment Information
  • Fixed Hourly Rates
  • Fixed Fees Available
Languages

English.

Clients

APPROVED ATTORNEY FOR: Buffalo Creek Public Service District, Don C Elkins Music, Inc., Ferrell Excavating Co., Logan Concrete, Inc. and Man Clothing & Jewelry Co.

Clients

LOCAL COUNSEL FOR: The Pittston Co. and affiliates.

Office Information
200 Bank One Building 229 Stratton Street, P.O. Box 899,
Logan, WV 25601
U.S.A.
Loading...

Office Hours
Monday
08:00 AM- 04:00 PM
Tuesday
08:00 AM- 04:00 PM
Wednesday
08:00 AM- 04:00 PM
Thursday
08:00 AM- 04:00 PM
Friday
08:00 AM- 04:00 PM
Saturday
By appointment
Sunday
By appointment

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.