Andrew M. Jackson Attorney at Law

Law Firm in Clinton, NC
Serving the needs of our customers in Sampson, Duplin and Pender County

Peer Rating N/A help_info

About This Firm

If you have received a speeding ticket or another moving violation in Duplin, Sampson, or Pender County, North Carolina, I can help reduce the impact of that citation on your insurance and on your driving record. Our all-inclusive flat fee to handle most infractions is only $399.

Don't pay off that ticket! Protect your driving privilege and avoid insurance points. You can save yourself valuable time - and improve the outcome of your case - by letting me make that court appearance for you.

In most cases I can obtain a reduction so that the ticket will not add points to your driver's license or insurance. Hiring me to handle your case takes only a few minutes online, or, if you prefer, you may contact my office by phone.

Areas of Law

  • Agriculture Law
  • Civil Litigation
  • Traffic Violations
  • DUI
  • Immigration
  • General Practice.
  • Work Visas
  • Real Estate
  • Estate
  • Wills
  • Probate and Trusts

Client Rating

Overall Client Rating

3.2 out of 5.0

Communication Ability
Quality of Service
Value for Money

  • Data based on 1 reviews
  • Last reviewed on 07/15/11
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

People at This Firm

Lawyer Name:
Area of Law:

Firm Details

Firm Size


Contact Information

Firm Address

Andrew M. Jackson Attorney at Law
407 College Street, P.O. Box 27,
Clinton, NC 28328-4009

Phone 1

888-991-9709 Call firm now

Phone 2





Send email to Andrew M. Jackson Attorney at Law

Office Information
 407 College Street, P.O. Box 27,
Clinton, NC 28328-4009


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.