Law Office of Lori M. Comforti, LLC

Law Firm in Norwich, CT

Free Consultation
Client Rating N/A help_info
Submit a client review

Peer Rating 4.5 of 5

About This Firm

In 2001, Attorney Comforti started her own law firm known as the Law Office of Lori M. Comforti, LLC, in Norwich. The firm moved to its present address at 108 Sachem Street in Norwich in the fall of 2008. Attorney Conley joined the firm in 2009. They have continued to concentrate their practice in the areas of workers compensation, social security disability, and personal injury litigation.

Areas of Law

  • Workers' Compensation
  • Casino Workers' Compensation
  • Personal Injury/Litigation
  • Social Security Disability
  • Automobile Collisions
  • Defective Premises
  • Slip & Fall
  • Accidents
  • Motor Vehicle Accidents and Injuries
  • Bicycle Accidents
  • Bus Accidents
  • Motorcycle Accidents
  • Animal Attacks
  • Dog Bites
  • Plaintiffs Personal Injury
  • Catastrophic Injury.

Peer Rating


Average Peer Rating

Based on this firm's rated lawyers
4.5 out of 5.0

Legal Knowledge
Analytical Capabilities
Communication Ability
Legal Experience

  • Lawyers rated at this firm meet very high criteria of general ethical standards
4.8 out of 5.0
4.2 out of 5.0

People at This Firm

Lawyer Name:
Area of Law:

Firm Details

Year Established


Firm Size


Payment Information
  • Free Initial Consultation

Contact Information

Firm Address

Law Office of Lori M. Comforti, LLC
108 Sachem Street,
Norwich, CT 06360

Phone 1

860-333-8939 Call firm now

Phone 2

(860) 889-3355


(860) 887-2249


Send email to Law Office of Lori M. Comforti, LLC

Office Information
 108 Sachem Street,
Norwich, CT 06360


Office Hours
08:00 AM- 04:30 PM
08:00 AM- 04:30 PM
08:00 AM- 04:30 PM
08:00 AM- 04:30 PM
08:00 AM- 03:00 PM

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.