A. Craig Abrahamson

Attorney in Tulsa, OK
A. Craig Abrahamson has been a tough, aggressive, skilled and successful litigator since 1979. Having achieved notable successes in complex oil and gas, bankruptcy, wrongful death and product liability litigation, Mr. Abrahamson focuses his practice on general civil litigation and bankruptcy. Mr. Abrahamson is a dedicated Family Law attorney handling Divorce, Child Custody, Visitation Rights, Child Support, Alimony, Spousal Support, Post Decree Modification and Enforcement of Custody, Visitation and Support, Premarital Agreements, Guardianship, Probate and Administration of Estates. Mr. Abrahamson represents Creditors and Debtors in Chapter 7, Chapter 11 and Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Cases. Mr. Abrahamson also represents clients in Business Litigation, Commercial Litigation, Real Estate Litigation, Real Estate Transactions, Landlord-Tenant , Business Law, and Commercial Transactions. Mr. Abrahamson is a frequent presenter of continuing legal education courses on Family Law and Landlord-Tenant Law. Mr. Abrahamson earned the American Jurisprudence Award in Evidence in 1978 and is the author of A New Look at Tax Exemptions and Child Support, OBA Family Law Section Update (June 1990). Mr. Abrahamson's biography can be found in Who's Who in the World; Who's Who in America; and Who's Who in American Law. Most importantly, Mr. Abrahamson is a dedicated lawyer who delivers affordable prompt professional, personal service to his clients. He is a knowledgeable lawyer with the skills and experience that make him worthy of your trust. Listed in Who's Who in the World, Who's Who in America, and Who's Who in American Law. Recipient, American Jurisprudence Award in Evidence.
918-553-8605
Free Consultation | Credit Cards Accepted
Client Rating N/A help_info
Submit a client review

Peer Rating 4.9 of 5
  • Family Law
  • Divorce
  • Child Custody
  • Visitation Rights
  • Child Support
  • Alimony
  • Spousal Support
  • Premarital Agreements
  • Bankruptcy
  • Bankruptcy Creditors
  • Bankruptcy Debtor Ch. 7
  • Bankruptcy Debtor Ch. 11
  • Bankruptcy Debtor Ch. 13
  • Business Law
  • Commercial Transactions
  • Commercial Litigation
  • Real Estate Transactions
  • Landlords
  • Bankruptcy Chapter 7
  • Bankruptcy Chapter 11
  • Bankruptcy Chapter 12
  • Bankruptcy Chapter 13
  • Bankruptcy Litigation
  • Bankruptcy Reorganization
  • Commercial Bankruptcy
  • Consumer Bankruptcy
  • Creditor Bankruptcy
  • Debt Relief
  • Debtor Bankruptcy
  • Fraudulent Conveyance
  • Insolvency
  • Personal Bankruptcy
  • Children
  • Grandparents Custody
  • Step Parent Adoptions
  • Third Party Custody
  • Commercial Law
  • Commercial Liability
  • Commercial Torts
  • Contracts
  • Breach of Contract
  • Commercial Contracts
  • Contract Litigation
  • Corporate Law
  • Closely Held Corporations
  • Corporate Commercial Law
  • Corporate Contracts
  • Corporate Dissolutions
  • Corporate Fiduciary Law
  • Corporate Formation
  • Corporate Litigation
  • Corporate Organization
  • Incorporation
  • S Corporations
  • Small Business Corporations
  • Debtor and Creditor
  • Creditors Rights
  • Creditors Rights in Bankruptcy
  • Debtor and Creditor Collections
  • Annulment
  • Domestic Relations
  • Domestic Violence
  • Domestic Torts
  • Equitable Distribution
  • Marital Agreements
  • Marital Property Distribution
  • Marital Property Law
  • Marital Property Settlements
  • Matrimonial Bankruptcy Law
  • Matrimonial Law
  • Name Changes
  • No Fault Divorce
  • Paternity
  • Post Divorce Modification
  • Qualified Domestic Relations Orders
  • Uncontested Divorce
  • Fraud and Deceit
  • Fraud
  • General Practice
  • Leases and Leasing
  • Commercial Landlord and Tenant Law
  • Commercial Leasing
  • Evictions
  • Landlord and Tenant Law
  • Lease Terminations
  • Shopping Center Leasing
  • Retail Leasing
  • Office Leasing
  • Unlawful Detainer
  • Leasing
  • Real Estate
  • Adverse Possession
  • Boundary Disputes
  • Homeowners Association Law
  • Property Management
  • Real Estate Bankruptcy
  • Real Estate Contracts
  • Real Estate Fraud
  • Real Estate Leasing
  • Real Estate Litigation
  • Torts
  • Civil Liability
  • Intentional Torts
  • Tort Liability

 

Peer Rating

av

Overall Peer Rating

in Family Law, Bankruptcy and General Practice
4.9 out of 5.0

Legal Knowledge
4.9
Analytical Capabilities
4.9
Judgment
4.8
Communication Ability
4.9
Legal Experience
5.0

  • Meets very high criteria of general ethical standards
Posted by a Private Practice Attorney on 09/10/14
5.0 out of 5.0
He is an A1+ lawyer, well versed, timely and knowledgeable. I would go to him. He also is very good in Family Law in addition to the one choice allowed above.
Report abuse
Posted by a Private Practice Attorney on 09/10/14
5.0 out of 5.0
Craig is a fierce advocate for his client, while at the same time he is very professional to work across from, always willing to extend professional courtesies. He is highly thought of in the community.
Report abuse
Posted by a Private Practice Attorney on 09/18/14
5.0 out of 5.0
Also work with him on Board of which he is trustee. Adds incredible value and epitomizes fiduciary duties.
Report abuse
Posted by a Judge on 09/10/14
5.0 out of 5.0
Highest ethics, and works hard to settle cases, rather than litigate. Always a gentleman in the courtroom.
Report abuse
Posted by a Private Practice Attorney on 09/10/14
5.0 out of 5.0
Craig clearly deserves an AV rating. I have worked with him most recently in mediations (with me being the mediator) and he is knowledgeable, analytical and a good communicator. He has substantial legal experience.
Report abuse
Posted by a Private Practice Attorney on 09/10/14
5.0 out of 5.0
Craig is an outstanding advocate and a asset to the Tulsa legal community.
Report abuse
Posted by a Private Practice Attorney on 09/10/14
5.0 out of 5.0
Craig is deserving of a continued AV rating.
Report abuse
Posted by a Private Practice Attorney on 09/10/14
5.0 out of 5.0
Craig is a fierce advocate for his clients, but, at the same time, is a very professional and courteous lawyer. He is highly thought of in our legal community. If he doesn't have AV rating yet, he certainly should.
Report abuse

Legal Community Activity

Experience & Credentials

Position

Principal

Admission Details

Admitted in 1979, Minnesota and U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota
1982, Oklahoma
1983, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Oklahoma
1988, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Oklahoma
1990, U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
1991, Missouri

Credit Cards Accepted
Mastercard
Visa
Additional Payment Information
  • Free Initial Consultation
  • Fixed Hourly Rates
  • Law School Attended

    University of Tulsa
    Class of 1979
    J.D.

    University Attended

    University of Minnesota
    Class of 1976
    B.A.

    Birth Information

    Born in 1954
    Washington, D.C., May 24, 1954

    Associations & Memberships

    Tulsa County (Member, Sections on: Family Law; Bankruptcy) and Oklahoma (Member, Sections on: Family Law; Bankruptcy, Intellectual Property) Bar Associations; The Missouri Bar.... More

    Bar Fellowship

    Tulsa County Bar Foundation.

    Representative Cases

    In re Adoption of M.J.S., 2007 OK 43, 162 P.3d 200; In re Adoption of M.J.S., 2007 OK 44, 162 P.3d 211; In re Winegarten, 101 B.R 705 (Bktcy E.D. Okla. 1989); In re Peterson, 182 B.R. 877, 27 Bankr.Ct.Dec. 337, Bankr. L. Rep. P 76,532 (Bkrtcy N.D. Okla 1995).

    Contact Information

    Phone

    918-584-0318 Call Now

    Fax

    918-398-5668

    Email

    Send email to A. Craig Abrahamson

    Social Networking



    Office Information
    A. Craig Abrahamson
    Principal
    706 Beacon Building 406 S. Boulder Avenue,
    Tulsa, OK 74103

    Loading...

    Logo
    A. Craig Abrahamson (Tulsa, Oklahoma)

    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.