William C. Fanning, Jr. LinkedIn

Attorney in La Plata, MD
Moot Court Associate. Honoree, Maryland Volunteer Lawyers Service. Adjunct Professor, Family Law & Paralegal Studies, College of Southern Maryland, 1994-1999. Sole Practitioner, William C. Fanning, Jr., Esquire, 1993-1995. Partner, Devine, Fanning, & Greer, P.A. 1997-2001. Partner, Devine & Fanning, P.A. 2001-2013, Sole Practitioner, Fanning Law, LLC 2013-.
240-776-2506
Credit Cards Accepted
  • Divorce
  • Custody and Support
  • Family Law
  • Adoption
  • General Civil Litigation
  • Personal Injury
  • Criminal Defense
  • Business Law
  • Employment Law
  • Estate Planning

 

Overall Client Rating

in Business Law and Family Law
4.8 out of 5.0

Communication Ability
4.9
Responsiveness
4.8
Quality of Service
4.8
Value for Money
4.8

  • Data based on 9 reviews
  • Recommended by 9 Clients
  • Last reviewed on 08/22/12
Posted by a Consumer on 08/22/12
Recommended
5.0 out of 5.0
I cannot say enough good things about Mr. Fanning. He helped me get custody of my 19-month-old son in a situation where it probably could have gone either way. He was so calm and professional in front of the master while my child's mother's lawyer was rude and aggressive. He is not only an excellent attorney who truly cares about his clients and wants the very best for them, he is a really great guy. I would recommend his services to anyone looking for a lawyer in the southern Maryland area.
Report abuse
Posted by a Consumer on 07/02/12
Recommended
5.0 out of 5.0
My husband and I used Mr. Fanning's services for two adoptions and we were very pleased with his personable demeanor, his efficiency, our questions and how he interacted with the family in general. He puts you at ease and makes you feel comfortable. We were equally pleased with his administrative staff as well.
Report abuse
Posted by a Consumer on 07/02/12
Recommended
5.0 out of 5.0
To whom it may concern: Hands down I would recommend Mr. Fanning to represent myself or anyone else in a courtroom. He represented me several times for an on going child support case several years back. Each time we left the courtroom people would get up an ask for his business card. He's a very good, honest, devoted an straight to the point type of person. Trust me when I tell you he kept me out of a lot of situations that could of turned bad. I could never thank him enough for his hard work!
Report abuse
Posted by a Consumer on 04/26/12
Recommended
5.0 out of 5.0
Mr. Fanning was great throughout both my cases that we won. I definitely recommend his services for anyone who wants to win a case.
Report abuse

Legal Community Activity

Experience & Credentials

Position

Attorney

Admission Details

Admitted in 1991, Maryland
1993, District of Columbia and U.S. District Court, District of Maryland
1995, U.S. Supreme Court
2005, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Credit Cards Accepted


Also accepts Other
Law School Attended

The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law
Class of 1991
J.D.

University Attended

Gwynn Park Senior High School
Class of 1984

Salisbury University
Class of 1988
B.A.
Political Science

Associations & Memberships

Charles County, Prince George's County, Maryland State and Federal Bar Associations.

Representative Cases

Butler v. Tilghman, 350 Md. 259, 711 A.2d 859 (1998); Goshorn v. Goshorn, 154 Md.App. 194, 838 A.2d 1247 (Md.App. 2003).

Hobbies & Interests

Reading, gardening and spending time with our four children.

Contact Information

Fax

240.523.6501 Call Now

Phone 1

301.934.3620

Phone 2

301.753.4316

Email

Send email to William C. Fanning, Jr.

Social Networking



Office Information
William C. Fanning, Jr.
Attorney
 201 Centennial Street, Suite 2A,
La Plata, MD 20646

Loading...

Logo
Fanning Law, LLC (La Plata, Maryland)

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.