Roger D. McGill

Attorney in Ebensburg, PA
Phi Eta Sigma. Internship, Senior Judge Ruggerio Aldisert, U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, 1983-1984. Member, Women's Help Center Board of Directors.
814-419-9750

Areas of Law

  • Domestic Relations
  • Divorce
  • Domestic Violence
  • Child Custody
  • Spousal Support
  • Adoptions
  • Alimony

 

Overall Client Rating

in Family Law
3.0 out of 5.0

Communication Ability
3.0
Responsiveness
3.0
Quality of Service
3.0
Value for Money
3.0

  • Data based on 2 reviews
  • Recommended by 1 Client
  • Last reviewed on 11/27/13
Posted by a Consumer on 11/27/13
1.0 out of 5.0
Roger McGill is a PIG. He preys on his female clients after offering to represent them pro bono. After I confronted the office about his behavior, they handed me my papers and told me to go. How is this right?
Why is it that lawyers can get away with everything? I know I'm not the only one that he has done this to. If you have dealt with this by him or would like more information please don't hesitate to contact me. cyannella29@verizon.net
Report abuse

Experience & Credentials

Position

Member

Admission Details

Admitted in 1984, Pennsylvania and U.S. District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania

Law School Attended

University of Pittsburgh
Class of 1984
J.D.

University Attended

University of Pittsburgh
Class of 1980
B.A.

Birth Information

Born in 1958
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, September 23, 1958

Associations & Memberships

Cambria County (Member, Family Law Section) and Pennsylvania Bar Associations.

Representative Cases

T.B. v. L.R.M., No. 62 WAP 2000.

Contact Information

Phone

814-472-9603


Office Information
Roger D. McGill
Member
 129 South Center Street, P.O. Box 239,
Ebensburg, PA 15931-0239

Loading...


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.