Steven H. Shindler LinkedIn

Attorney in West Des Moines, IA
Order of Barristers. Author: "The Speed of Trial Timeclock," Criminal Law Techniques, Matthew Bender, 1992. Legal Counsel, Jackson County, Kansas City, Missouri, 1983. Executive Assistant to Chief Justice W.W. Reynoldson, Iowa Supreme Court, 1983-1984.
515-421-8937
Credit Cards Accepted

Areas of Law

  • Family Law
  • Personal Injury

 

Overall Client Rating

in Family 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 12/08/13
Posted by a Consumer on 12/08/13
Recommended
5.0 out of 5.0
He is the Best ! Won my case when no one else would even try. My kids and I owe him a lot.
Report abuse

Experience & Credentials

Position

Member

Admission Details

Admitted in 1983, Missouri
1984, Nebraska and Iowa

Credit Cards Accepted
Discover
Mastercard
Visa
Additional Payment Information
  • Fixed Hourly Rates
  • Law School Attended

    California Western School of Law
    Class of 1982
    J.D.

    University Attended

    Drake University
    Class of 1977
    B.A.

    Birth Information

    Born in 1954
    Yankton, South Dakota, November 26, 1954

    Associations & Memberships

    Polk County, Iowa State, Nebraska State and American Bar Associations; The Missouri Bar.

    Contact Information

    Phone

    515-223-4567 Call Now

    Email

    Send email to Steven H. Shindler


    Office Information
    Steven H. Shindler
    Member
     5015 Grand Ridge Drive, Suite 100,
    West Des Moines, IA 50265-5749

    Loading...

    Logo
    Hudson, Mallaney, Shindler & Anderson, P.C. (West Des Moines, Iowa)

    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.