Janet M. Meiburger

Attorney in McLean, VA
Phi Beta Kappa; Order of the Coif. Root Tilden Scholar. Articles Editor, Annual Survey of American Law.

Areas of Law

  • Bankruptcy
  • Workouts
  • Debtor and Creditor
  • Civil Litigation
  • Business Law
  • Commercial Law
  • Contracts
  • Commercial Transactions


Overall Client Rating

in Contracts
5.0 out of 5.0

Communication Ability
Quality of Service
Value for Money

  • Data based on 1 reviews
  • Recommended by 1 Client
  • Last reviewed on 08/17/10
No feedback is available.
The individuals that have reviewed this lawyer have not provided any additional feedback.
Are you a former client?  Submit a review

Experience & Credentials



Admission Details

Admitted in 1978, District of Columbia
1990, Virginia
1999, Maryland
2003, Missouri
U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Eastern and Western Districts of Virginia
U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Maryland
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Columbia
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia
U.S. District Court, District of Maryland
U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

Law School Attended

New York University School of Law
cum laude

New York University School of Law
LL.M. in Taxation

University Attended

St. Louis University
summa cum laude

Associations & Memberships

Bar Association of the District of Columbia; Virginia Bar Association; The Missouri Bar; American Bar Association; Northern Virginia Bankruptcy Bar Association; Bankruptcy Bar Association fo... More

Contact Information






Send email to Janet M. Meiburger

Office Information
Janet M. Meiburger
 1493 Chain Bridge Road, Suite 201,
McLean, VA 22101


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.