Lawyers.com > Find a Lawyer > Samuel-F-Reynolds-Jr

Help

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Email To A Friend

Samuel F. Reynolds, Jr.

Samuel F. Reynolds, Jr. is a Lawyer in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Client Rating 4.8 / 5.0

Submit a review

Peer Rating 5.0 / 5.0

412-253-2892

Call Now

http://www.wgbglaw.com

Free Consultation

View Website

About This Lawyer

Samuel F. Reynolds, Jr. was born in West Chester, Pennsylvania. He received his undergraduate degree with honors from Pennsylvania State University, a law degree from Duquesne Law School, where he was an Executive Editor of the Law Review, and a Master of Laws degree with high honors from Tulane Law School, where he was selected and served as a graduate fellow. He is admitted to practice in Pennsylvania (active), Louisiana (inactive), the United States Supreme Court and several federal trial and appellate courts.

Mr. Reynolds is an experienced trial lawyer, focusing on commercial and complex cases, business litigation, corporate law, employment law, discrimination and sexual ha... View more

Areas of Law

Commercial Litigation
Employment Law
Discrimination
Handicapped Rights
Maritime Law

Sex Discrimination
Race Discrimination
Bankruptcy Litigation
Corporate Law

Contact Information

Phone

412-566-2520 ext. 112 Call Now

Fax

412-566-1088

Mobile

412-389-3728

Website

http://www.wgbglaw.com

Networking

Client Rating

Peer Rating

Overall Client Rating

in Litigation, Admiralty and Maritime Law and Appellate Practice

4.8 out of 5.0

Communication Ability

4.7

Responsiveness

4.8

Quality of Service

4.8

Value for Money

4.7

Data based on 13 reviews
Recommended by 12 Clients
Last reviewed on 01/29/13

Posted by a Small Business on 03/19/12

5.0 out of 5.0

Sam has offered great support in a lot of areas and we continue to look to him for guidance in the future.

Report abuse

Posted by a Consumer on 03/14/12

5.0 out of 5.0

Exceptional commitment to his client even when the client does not actively participate.Driven to do what is best for the client. A genuinely honest man.

Report abuse

Posted by a Consumer on 03/13/12

5.0 out of 5.0

Mr. Reynolds made the entire legal process very understandable. He took great care in every aspect to ensure that all of our questions were answered and that our concerns were met. He provided great attention to all small and large details. We felt confident that we were his priority during the process. We would strongly recommend Mr. Reynolds to any and all families who need legal services. He is a brilliant lawyer who follows through on everything.

Report abuse

Posted by a Consumer on 03/12/12

5.0 out of 5.0

Before I do anything in my life I pray and ask for guidance, discernment and uncommon wisdom and then I commit it into GOD'S HANDS and then there is peace.Sam is client driven and honest down to each i he dots.I didn't have enough money to pay for parking;Sam took care of it.At one point I had to do be in Pittsburgh two days back to back. Sam and his wife and two beautiful dogs opened their home to me because of the gas prices.You see GOD only wants the very best for us. That's why there is Sam.

Report abuse

Posted by a Consumer on 03/07/12

5.0 out of 5.0

Attorney Reynolds took our breach of contract claim and negotiated a very favorable result. We would certainly use him again and highly recommend his services.

Report abuse

Posted by a Small Business on 03/07/12

5.0 out of 5.0

Sam always returns my calls in a timely fashion and handles our needs promptly.

Report abuse

Posted by a Consumer on 03/07/12

5.0 out of 5.0

Sam is a credit to the legal profession.

Report abuse

Posted by a Consumer on 03/07/12

5.0 out of 5.0

Samuel Reynolds' knowledge of the law and his ability to apply it in a professional manner, on a personal level is exceptional. He holds his clients interests to the highest level. With a keen attention to detail he delivers a service to both his clients and the law profession that should be used as a "quality" standard within the legal profession.

Report abuse

Experience & Credentials

Position

Member

Admission Details

Admitted in Pennsylvania
Louisiana
U.S. District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania
U.S. Court of Appeals, Third and Fifth Circuits

Additional Payment Information

Free Initial Consultation

Law School Attended

Duquesne University
Class of 1984
J.D.

Tulane University
Class of 1985
LL.M.
with honors

University Attended

Pennsylvania State University
Class of 1980
B.A.
with honors

Associations & Memberships

Allegheny County, Pennsylvania and Federal Bar Associations.

Representative Cases

Lois E. Taylor, personally and on behalf of Paul Durand Arnold v. Texaco, Inc., Daptco Marine Corp. and Platform Well Service, Inc., 814 F.2d 231 (5th Cir. 1987); Trinity Industries, Inc. v. Insurance Company of North America, 916 F.2d 267 (5th Cir. 1990); A & P Boat Rentals, Inc. v. American Lloyd's, a Louisiana Lloyd's Plan Insurer, et al., 592 So. 2d 1361 (La. App. 1st Cir. 1991); Magnolia Marine Transport Co., et al., v. Barbara B. Frye, et al., 1991 AMC 1190 (E.D.La. 1991); McGinnis, Inc. v. Mariner Transp., Inc., et al., 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7960 (E.D.La. May 28, 1992); Robert Neel v. Citrus Lands of Louisiana, Inc., and James McRea, 629 So. 2d 1299 (La. App. 4th Cir. 1993); Silver Star Enterprises, Inc. v. M/V Saramacca, et al., 1995 AMC 458 (E.D.La. 1994); James Anthony Rainone v. Exxon Corp., McDonough Marine Service and United Tugs, Inc., 654 So. 2d 707 (La. App. 1st Cir. 1995); Lee Darbonne v. Exxon Corp., et al., consolidated with Brent Gauthreaux, et al. v. Exxon Corp., et al. and Land Treatment Systems, Inc. v. Exxon Corp. et al., 657 So. 2d 598 (La. App. 1st Cir. 1995); Anthony Seborowski et al., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. Pittsburgh Press Company, PG Publishing Company, Scripps Howard Inc, Pittsburgh Typographical Union No. 7, James C. Lowen et al., 188 F.3d 163 (3d Cir. 1999); Levy v. Lenenberg, No. 231 WDA 2001, 2002 PA Super 75; 795 A.2d 419; 2002 Pa. Super. LEXIS 333; Official Comm. of Unsecured Creditors of Forman Enters. v. Forman (In re Forman Enters.), Bankruptcy No. 00-20523-BM, Chapter 7, Adversary No. 00-2683-BM, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, 281 B.R. 600; 2002 Bankr. LEXIS 802; 39 Bankr. Ct. Dec. 245; 2002-2 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) P50, 655; 90 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 5563, decided August 2, 2002; Official Comm. of Unsecured Creditors of Forman Enters. v. Forman (In re Forman Enters.), Bankruptcy No. 00-20523-BM, Chapter 7, Adversary No. 00-2683-BM, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, 273 B.R. 408; 2002 Bankr. LEXIS 73; Bankr. L. Rep. (CCH) P78, 586; 39 Bankr. Ct. Dec. 3; 2002-1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) P50, 338; 89 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 848, January 31, 2002, Decided; Judgment entered by Official Comm. of Unsecured Creditors of Forman Enters. v. Forman (In re Forman Enters.), 281 B.R. 600, 2002 Bankr. LEXIS 802 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 2002); Swiss Reinsurance Am. Co. v. Airport Indus. Park, Inc., 2:05-cv-01127, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62957, August 27, 2007, Vacated by, Remanded by Swiss Reinsurance Am. Corp. v. Airport Indus. Park, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 9701 (3d Cir. Pa., May 5, 2009); Sprague Energy Corp. v. Union Drawn Steel II, LTD, Civil Action No. 07-962, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20335, (W.D.Pa., March 12, 2008); Gillespie v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., Civil Action No. 08-689, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26310, 105 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1875 (W.D. Pa., March 30, 2009); Gillespie v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., Civil Action No. 08-689, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35666 (W.D. Pa., April 28, 2009); Gillespie v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., Civil Action No. 08 - 689, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55717 (W.D. Pa., June 30, 2009). Less

Office Information

Samuel F. Reynolds, Jr.

Weisman Goldman Bowen & Grzywinski, LLP

Grant Building, Suite 1200 310 Grant Street,
Pittsburgh, PA 15219-2243
U.S.A.

Logo

Weisman Goldman Bowen & Grzywinski, LLP (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania)

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.

Samuel F. Reynolds, Jr.

About This Lawyer

Areas of Law

Contact Information

Client Rating

Peer Rating

Overall Client Rating

Overall Peer Rating

Experience & Credentials

Site Resources

Regional Sites

LexisNexis Resources

Connect with Us