John Allen Chalk

Attorney in Fort Worth, TX

As general counsel for a large, independent petroleum refining and marketing company (1978-84), as special counsel for a Texas real estate developer (1984-86), and as a member of two law firms (1973-78; 1986 - present), Mr. Chalk understands what clients want from their lawyers and how lawyers best serve their clients. As a negotiator, litigator, mediator, and arbitrator, Mr. Chalk constantly applies cost-benefit and risk analysis in assisting clients and opposing parties to understand the importance of efficient resolution of their disputes.

Chalk represents clients in commercial transactions and litigation, state and federal regulatory matters, and ADR proceedings. Post-secondary proprietary schools and colleges in numerous states require his appearances before state and federal regulatory agencies. He has assisted clients with project and corporate finance, and business restructure and sale transactions, domestically and internationally. Five arbitral institutions (domestic and international) include Chalk on their neutrals' panels and have appointed him as either mediator or arbitrator in hundreds of ADR proceedings involving business, entities, health care, employment, insurance, franchise, real estate, oil and gas, aviation, intellectual property, and other disputes.

Professional Associations

· Founding Co-Editor, Family Advocate, American Bar Association.

· Founding Member, Former President of Osteopathic Health Foundation, Ft Worth.

· Director, Treasurer, Vice-President, President, Tarrant County Bar Association, 2004-2009.

· Fellow, College of Commercial Arbitrators


Credit Cards Accepted
Client Rating N/A help_info
Submit a client review

Peer Rating 5.0 of 5

Areas of Law

  • Alternative Dispute Resolution
  • Domestic & International Arbitration/Mediation
  • Administrative Law
  • State & Federal Regulatory Law
  • Corporate & Business Law
  • Commercial Litigation
  • Post Secondary Education Law
  • Project and Corporate Finance Transactions
  • Mergers & Acquisitions
  • Employment Litigation
  • Real Estate Litigation
  • Healthcare
  • School Law


Peer Rating


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



Admission Details

Admitted in 1973, Texas
1974, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas
1977, District of Columbia, U.S. District Court, Western District of Texas, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit and U.S. Supreme Court
1979, Temporary Emergency Court of Appeals of the United States
2003, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas

Credit Cards Accepted
Additional Payment Information
  • Fixed Hourly Rates
  • Fixed Fees Available
  • Law School Attended

    University of Texas School of Law
    Class of 1973

    University Attended

    Tennessee Tech University
    Class of 1962

    Tennessee Tech University
    Class of 1967

    Special Agencies

    U.S. Department of Education; Texas Workforce Commission; Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board; Texas Education Agency.

    Bar Fellowship

    and Chartered Arbitrator, The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, London, England. · Member, Neutrals' Panel, American Arbitration Association. · Member, Neutrals' Panel, American Health Lawyers Association. · Member, Neutrals' Panel, CPR International Institute for Conflict Prevention and Resolution. · Member, L... More

    Contact Information






    Send email to John Allen Chalk

    Office Information
    John Allen Chalk
     301 Commerce Street, Suite 3500,
    Fort Worth, TX 76102-4186


    Whitaker Chalk Swindle & Schwartz PLLC (Fort Worth, Texas)

    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.