Michael R. Ascher

Attorney in Denville, NJ
Deputy Attorney General, Division of Criminal Justice, 1974-1976. Assistant Passaic County Prosecutor, 1976-1977. Frequent Lecturer on issues of Domestic Violence, School Violence and Children's Records Law.
Credit Cards Accepted
Client Rating N/A help_info
Rating Not Shown
Submit a client review

Peer Rating 4.8 of 5

Areas of Law

  • Criminal Defense
  • Civil Litigation
  • Juvenile Law
  • Chancery
  • Driving While Intoxicated

Rating Not Shown
This lawyer has chosen not to display the rating(s) provided by his or her clients.

Experience & Credentials



Admission Details

Admitted in 1974, New Jersey and U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey

Credit Cards Accepted
American Express
Additional Payment Information
  • Fixed Fees Available
  • Law School Attended

    New York Law School
    Class of 1974

    University Attended

    Lehigh University
    Class of 1971

    Birth Information

    Born in 1949
    New York, N.Y., June 9, 1949

    Associations & Memberships

    Morris County (Member: Alternative Dispute Resolution Committee; Contract Litigation Arbitrator, Contract Litigation Settlement Panel; Criminal Practice Committee), New Jersey State and Ameri... More

    Representative Cases

    State v. Dispoto 189 NJ 108 (2006; on requirement to re-mirandize defandant); DYFS v. S.S., 372 NJ Super. 131 (App. Div., 2004; on standards for substantiation of abuse and removal from Central Abuse Directory).

    Contact Information


    973-627-7300 Call Now

    Office Information
    Michael R. Ascher
     165 East Main Street, P.O. Box 3010,
    Denville, NJ 07834-0541


    Einhorn, Harris, Ascher, Barbarito & Frost, P.C. (Denville, New Jersey)

    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.