William L. Goldman

William L. Goldman 0 0 reviews - Read Reviews or Write a Review
William L. Goldman is a Lawyer in Doylestown, Pennsylvania

267-454-2879
Credit Cards Accepted

About This Lawyer

Phi Alpha Delta. Listed, The Best Lawyers in America, 1983—. Member of Panel, American Arbitration Association, 1965-1980.

Areas of Law

  • Domestic Relations
  • Divorce
  • Family Law

Contact Information

Phone

215-348-2605 Call Now

Fax

215-348-5247

Email

Send email to William L. Goldman

 

Peer Rating

av

Overall Peer Rating

5.0 out of 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

Member

Admission Details

Admitted in 1951, Pennsylvania and District of Columbia

Credit Cards Accepted
Law School Attended

Temple University
Class of 1951
J.D.

University Attended

Temple University
Class of 1942
B.S.

Birth Information

Born in 1919
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, May 13, 1919

Associations & Memberships

Bucks County (Member, Board of Directors, 1963-1964; Treasurer, 1966-1971; Vice President, 1973-1974; President, 1974-1975), Pennsylvania (State Chairman, Minor Judiciary Small Claims Procedure Committee, 1975-1977; Member, Executive Council, Family Law, 1975—; Vice Chairman, 1984-1985, Family Law Section; First Vice President, Family Law Sec... More

Bar Fellowship

American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers (Member, Board of Managers, Pennsylvania Chapter, 1984—); International Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers.

Office Information
William L. Goldman
90 E. State Street, P.O. Box 1989,
Doylestown, PA 18901-4362
U.S.A.
Loading...

Logo
Law Offices of William L. Goldman, P.C. (Doylestown, Pennsylvania)

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.