J. Arthur Davison

Attorney in Augusta, GA
Phi Kappa Phi. Staff Member, Georgia Law Review, 1979-1981.
706-724-0171
Client Rating N/A help_info
Submit a client review

Peer Rating 5.0 of 5

Areas of Law

  • Litigation
  • Personal Injury

 

Peer Rating

av

Overall Peer Rating

in Litigation, Personal Injury and Insurance
5.0 out of 5.0

Legal Knowledge
5.0
Analytical Capabilities
5.0
Judgment
5.0
Communication Ability
5.0
Legal Experience
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

Position

Partner

Admission Details

Admitted in 1981, Georgia, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Georgia and U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit
1982, South Carolina and U.S. District Court, District of South Carolina
1998, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Law School Attended

University of Georgia School of Law
Class of 1981
J.D.
Georgia Law Review

University Attended

University of Georgia
Class of 1978
B.B.A.
cum laude

Birth Information

Born in 1956
Macon, Georgia, September 29, 1956

Associations & Memberships

Augusta Bar Association (President, 2008); State Bar of Georgia; South Carolina Bar; Defense Research Institute; Georgia Defense Lawyers Association; Young Lawyers Club of Augusta (President,... More

Bar Fellowship

Lawyers Foundation of Georgia.

Representative Cases

Cowart v. Widener, 287Ga.622(2010); Bonner v. Southern Restaurant Group, Inc., 271 Ga. App. 497(2005); Resnick v. Meybohm Realty, Inc., 269 Ga. App. 486 (2004).

Contact Information

Phone

706-724-0171

Fax

706-396-3619

Email

Send email to J. Arthur Davison


Office Information
J. Arthur Davison
Partner
 One 10th Street, Suite 700,
Augusta, GA 30901

Loading...

Logo
Fulcher Hagler LLP (Augusta, Georgia)

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.