Fred Lane

Attorney in Chicago, IL
Editor, Medical Trial Technique Quarterly. Former Assistant State's Attorney of Cook County. Author: Lane's Goldstein Trial Technique (3 volumes); Lane Medical Litigation Guide (4 volumes); Lane's Goldstein Trial Technique Quarterly; Lane's Goldstein Litigation Forms (3 volumes). Instructor: Trial Practice, Trial Technique Institute for the Illinois State Bar Association.
312-332-1400; 1-800-Lawyers
Free Consultation
Client Rating N/A help_info
Submit a client review

Peer Rating N/A help_info

Areas of Law

  • Personal Injury
  • Wrongful Death
  • Medical and Professional Negligence
  • Products Liability
  • Premises Liability
  • Vehicular Negligence
  • Medical Malpractice
  • Automobile Accidents and Injuries
  • Slip and Fall
  • Animal Bites
  • Trucking Accidents
  • Railroad Accident
  • Toxic Torts
  • Class Actions
  • Jones Act
  • OSHA
  • Litigation
  • Birth Injuries
  • Cerebral Palsy
  • Head and Spinal Injuries
  • Nursing Home Litigation


Experience & Credentials



Admission Details

Admitted in 1950, Illinois

Additional Payment Information
  • Free Initial Consultation
  • Law School Attended

    Loyola University
    Class of 1950

    Birth Information

    Born in 1925
    April 1, 1925

    Associations & Memberships

    Chicago and Illinois State (President, 1986-1987) Bar Associations; Society of Trial Lawyers; American Trial Lawyers Association; Illinois Trial Lawyers Association (Past President); Decalogue Societ... More

    Bar Fellowship

    International Academy of Trail Lawyers.

    Contact Information


    312-332-1400; 1-800-Lawyers


    Send email to Fred Lane

    Office Information
    Fred Lane
     230 West Monroe Street, Suite 1900,
    Chicago, IL 60606


    Lane & Lane, LLC (Chicago, Illinois)

    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.


    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.