Lawyers.com > Find a Lawyer > Maddox-Isaacson-And-Cisneros-Llp

Help

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Email To A Friend

Maddox, Isaacson & Cisneros, LLP

Maddox, Isaacson & Cisneros, LLP is a Law Firm in Las Vegas, Nevada

Client Rating 5.0 / 5.0

Submit a review

Peer Rating 4.9 / 5.0

702-487-4708

Call firm now

http://www.mic-law.com

View Website

About This Firm

Protecting the Rights of Plaintiffs in Civil Litigation

Our law firm was born on the shores of Lake Tahoe in October 1975. After graduating from Harvard Law School in 1970, Robert ("Bob") C. Maddox commenced his legal career with one of the premier American law firms in San Francisco. After gaining experience with complex business litigation, Bob decided he wanted to live in a beautiful natural environment and to have a closer connection to the clients he would be representing - being closer to the ski slopes sealed the deal. In the early years at Tahoe, we were retained by numerous homeowner associations. In 1977, we filed what was among the first homeowner association construction defect lawsuits in the state. The condominium complex had two... View more

Protecting the Rights of Plaintiffs in Civil Litigation

Our law firm was born on the shores of Lake Tahoe in October 1975. After graduating from Harvard Law School in 1970, Robert ("Bob") C. Maddox commenced his legal career with one of the premier American law firms in San Francisco. After gaining experience with complex business litigation, Bob decided he wanted to live in a beautiful natural environment and to have a closer connection to the clients he would be representing - being closer to the ski slopes sealed the deal.
In the early years at Tahoe, we were retained by numerous homeowner associations. In 1977, we filed what was among the first homeowner association construction defect lawsuits in the state. The condominium complex had two fires in a very short period of time with fire spreading much too rapidly to adjoining condominium units. The defects were identified, the case was pursued to a negotiated resolution, and all of the defects were corrected at no cost to the homeowners.
In 1986, Robert C. Maddox & Associates settled a lawsuit in South Lake Tahoe, California involving 91 townhomes for a total of $7.6 million. At $83,500.00 per unit, this was, and remains, one of the largest settlements of a construction defect case on a per-unit basis anywhere in the country. In 1991, the firm relocated to Reno because of the large volume of business that it had taken on in the Reno-Sparks area. The firm continued to develop representation of homeowners' associations as general counsel as well as representation of homeowners and homeowners' associations in pursuit of construction defect claims. Notable successes included the Ironhorse Village Condominium, Clear Acre Condominium, and Huffaker Hills Townhouse construction defect cases, all of which were favorably resolved. In each case, all construction defects were repaired at no cost to the homeowners.
During the 1995 legislative session, the homebuilders of Southern Nevada proposed legislation that would dramatically reduce the rights of Nevada homeowners to pursue construction defect claims. Mr. Maddox led other lawyers with the Nevada Trial Lawyers Association (now the Nevada Justice Association), and sought to defeat the proposed legislation. Ultimately, a compromise legislative package was worked out and passed which created NRS 40.600 through 40.695, commonly referred to as "Chapter 40." The provisions of Chapter 40 essentially constituted a Bill of Rights for Nevada Homeowners. Among the most important aspects of the legislation was a provision entitling Nevada homeowners pursuing construction defect claims to recover not only the cost of repairing the homes but the expert fees, court and litigation costs and attorneys' fees incurred by or on behalf of the homeowners in pursuit of the claims. In subsequent legislative sessions, the home builders and their allies have sought to change the law, but with the help of other NJA lawyers, Mr. Maddox has managed to preserve the rights of Nevada homeowners. The protection of homeowner rights in the legislature has also included defending various provisions of NRS Chapter 116 governing homeowner associations in Nevada.
Building on the success of Robert C. Maddox & Associates, our Las Vegas office was opened in 1997, and has continuously and aggressively pursued the interests of homeowners and homeowners' associations in southern Nevada. In 2004, Troy L. Isaacson joined the southern Nevada office of Robert C. Maddox & Associates and continued to build on the firm's success in helping homeowners and homeowners associations resolve their construction defects problems. Adding his significant trial experience, Norberto ("Norby") J. Cisneros joined the firm in 2009 to create Maddox, Isaacson & Cisneros, LLP. The firm's accomplishments in construction defect cases are legion. Although the majority of our cases are resolved by negotiation, we do not hesitate to go to trial if that proves to be necessary. In early 2003, we obtained one of the largest judgments ($14.2 million) in a construction defect case in Nevada history.
In addition to our successes in negotiating settlements on behalf of our clients and our superb track record in trying cases, we have obtained numerous notable decisions in the Nevada Supreme Court including:
Wardleig v. Second Judicial Dist. Court, 111 Nev. 345 (1995)
McKeeman v. General Am. Life Ins. Co., 111 Nev. 1042 (1995)
Calloway v. City of Reno, 116 Nev. 250 (2000)
Burch v. Second District Court, 118 Nev. 438, 442, 49 P.3d 647, 650 (2002).
Desert Fireplaces Plus, Inc. v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. Ad. Op. 70 (2004)
We at Maddox, Isaacson & Cisneros, LLP, remain committed to our mission of delivering practical, incisive advice aimed at helping clients make knowledgeable decisions when confronted with otherwise overwhelming legal issues. Less

Areas of Law

Complex Litigation
Trial Practice
Homeowners Association Law
Civil Litigation
Construction Defects
Environmental Law
Civil Trial
Real Estate
Water Law.

Commercial Law
Construction Law
Products Liability
Personal Injury
Mass Torts
Insurance Bad Faith
Consumer Fraud
Litigation

Contact Information

Firm Address

Maddox, Isaacson & Cisneros, LLP
3811 West Charleston Boulevard, Suite 110,
Las Vegas, NV 89102
U.S.A.

Phone 1

702-487-4708 Call firm now

Phone 2

702.366.1900

Fax

702.366.1999

Firm Website

http://www.mic-law.com

People at This Firm

Lawyer Name:

Area of Law:

Filter

Client Rating

Peer Rating

Overall Client Rating

in Consumer Law

5.0 out of 5.0

Communication Ability

5.0

Responsiveness

5.0

Quality of Service

5.0

Value for Money

5.0

Data based on 1 reviews
Recommended by 1 Client
Last reviewed on 07/25/11

Posted by a Consumer on 07/25/11

5.0 out of 5.0

Mr. Isaacson i'm very grateful too you sometimes you have questions and you want simple answers he took the time to help me get confidence because shared that knowledge with me and he could of been like the rest no response, stay a lover of righteous. Thank you

Report abuse

Firm Details

Firm Size

Office Information

Maddox, Isaacson & Cisneros, LLP

3811 West Charleston Boulevard, Suite 110,
Las Vegas, NV 89102
U.S.A.

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.

An explanation of the Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings

A Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rating reflects a combination of achieving a Very High General Ethical Standards rating and a Legal Ability numerical rating.

General Ethical Standards Rating

The General Ethical Standards rating denotes adherence to professional standards of conduct and ethics, reliability, diligence and other criteria relevant to the discharge of professional responsibilities.

Those lawyers who meet the "Very High" criteria of General Ethical Standards can proceed to the next step in the ratings process.

Legal Ability Ratings

For lawyers rated with the changed methodology, Legal Ability ratings will now indicate professional ability within a specific area of practice. Legal Ability ratings are based on performance in five key areas, rated on a scale of 1 to 5 (with 1 being the lowest and 5 being the highest). These areas are:
Legal Knowledge - Lawyer's familiarity with the laws governing his/her specific area of practice(s)
Analytical Capabilities - Lawyer's creativity in analyzing legal issues and applying technical knowledge
Judgment - Lawyer's demonstration of the salient factors that drive the outcome of a given case or issue.
Communication Ability - Lawyer's capability to communicate persuasively and credibly
Legal Experience - Lawyer's degree of experience in his/her specific area of practice(s)

Additional Feedback

The changed Peer Review Ratings allow reviewers to provide optional Additional Feedback on the lawyer under review. Additional Feedback is displayed anonymously in conjunction with the review results to the lawyer under review. LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell reserves the right not to display any feedback.

Reviewer Demographics

Peer Review Ratings are anonymous and reviewers' identities are not published, but in an effort to provide more details to the users of Peer Review Ratings, LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell will aggregate reviewers' basic demographics, including general position and general geographic location, which may be published with the ratings display on martindale.com® and Lawyers.comsm. Examples of basic demographics are "private practice lawyer, senior partner, New York, USA."

The Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rating

After a lawyer's General Ethical Standards and Legal Ability Ratings are confirmed, his/her ratings are aggregated to create an overall numeric rating for each rated Area of Practice. The numeric rating determines the Peer Review Rating, which includes a rating term and may include a Certification Mark:

AV® Preeminent™ (4.5 - 5.0) - An AV® certification mark is a significant rating accomplishment - a testament to the fact that a lawyer's peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence.

BV® Distinguished™ (3.0 - 4.4) - The BV® certification mark is an excellent rating for a lawyer with some experience. A widely respected mark of achievement, it differentiates a lawyer from his or her competition.

Rated (1.0 - 2.9) - The Peer Review Rated designation demonstrates that the lawyer has met the very high criteria of General Ethical Standing.

For lawyers rated in the existing program, the display will appear differently than those reviewed in the changed methodology. Because the lawyers converted to the new display have yet to be re-reviewed in the changed system, there will not be the depth of detail available on their Legal Ability Rating, Area of Practice specificity, Additional Feedback or Reviewer's Demographic data.

The Reviewers and Anonymity

The reviewers are members of the Bar and Judiciary (lawyers and judges) across multiple jurisdictions and geographic locations and are listed on martindale.com. They are from similar areas of practice and/or industry as the lawyer being rated, who know or have worked with the lawyer under review and are able to rate them on their professional ethical standards and legal ability. All Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings review materials are treated as anonymous. LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell takes steps to protect your anonymity (e.g., not associating reviewer names with their responses and aggregating their responses with responses from other reviewers before sharing or publishing them). But it is possible that their responses may contain sufficient information to allow the rated lawyer to ascertain their identity.

Facilitating the Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings Process

LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell facilitates the peer review process by gathering responses, validating them and aggregating results for display online. The content of the responses are entirely from reviewers, the peers of the lawyer. Peer reviewers must affirm that they are a peer of the lawyer identified for review. A peer can submit only one review for a specific lawyer within a 12-month period.

A lawyer's rating will generally improve over time. But LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review ratings can be revised downward, or even removed if a decline is noted in ability or ethical standards. While LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell makes available the option of regular rating reviews for the lawyers, the most recent results are relied upon when determining the final rating.

It is important to note that because LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell does not undertake to develop Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings for all lawyers, the fact that a lawyer is not rated should not be construed unfavorably. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review responses displayed in whole or in part by LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell. LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell may use your responses in whole or in part in accordance with the Terms and Conditions, but it is not required to do so. LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell reserves the right, in its sole, unrestricted discretion, not to publish or otherwise use all or any portion of any responses or submissions it may receive.

No subscription or listing on martindale.com or lawyers.com is ever solicited or accepted on the promise of publication of a particular Peer Review Rating. No preferential consideration is ever given to any lawyer or law firm. There is never any payment made to lawyers and judges who participate in rating reviews. The process is a cooperative service with the Bar and the Judiciary.

It is LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell policy to conduct regular random periodic reviews of all Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings to insure their accuracy. Where supporting opinions dictate, appropriate action (such as deleting, raising or lowering a rating) is taken.

Disbarred or suspended lawyers automatically have their LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings removed as soon as notified by a state Bar. Other types of lawyer disciplinary actions administered by the appropriate Bar or judicial authorities may also be grounds to remove a rating. While Bar admitting authorities supply LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell with disciplinary information, LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell also reserves the right to investigate information developed from the Bar or the judiciary regarding rated lawyers that have occurred that may impact the ethical standards of a rated lawyer.

Maddox, Isaacson & Cisneros, LLP

About This Firm

Areas of Law

Contact Information

People at This Firm

Client Rating

Peer Rating

Overall Client Rating

Average Peer Rating

Firm Details

Site Resources

Regional Sites

LexisNexis Resources

Connect with Us