Terry L. Unruh

Attorney in Wichita, KS
Law Clerk to the Honorable Sam A. Crow, U.S. District Judge, District of Kansas, 1982-1985. Co-Author: Civil Rights Chapter, Kansas Annual Survey of Law, Kansas Bar Association, 1990-; Kansas Bar Association Insurance Law Institute: ERISA Litigation, 2004; "Litigating Benefit, Fiduciary and Discrimination Claims Under ERISA," Kansas Bar Association, 1991.
316-267-1281
Client Rating N/A help_info
Submit a client review

Peer Rating 5.0 of 5

Areas of Law

  • Civil Appeals
  • Civil Litigation
  • Insurance
  • Labor and Employment
  • ERISA Litigation
  • Civil Rights

 

Peer Rating

av

Overall Peer Rating

5.0 out of 5.0
  • Meets very high criteria of general ethical standards
No feedback is available.
The individuals that have reviewed this lawyer have not provided any additional feedback.

Experience & Credentials

Position

Member

Admission Details

Admitted in 1979, Kansas and U.S. District Court, District of Kansas
1987, U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
2009, U.S. District Court, Western District of Missouri
2012, U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
1991, U.S. Supreme Court

Law School Attended

Washburn University
Class of 1979
J.D.
with honors

University Attended

Bethel College
Class of 1971
B.A.

Birth Information

Born in 1947
Goessel, Kansas, 1947

Associations & Memberships

Wichita (Chairperson, Committee on Professional Diversity, 1996-1997), Kansas and American Bar Associations; Kansas Association for Justice (Commercial Law Editor, KTLA Journal, 1992-1997).... More

Contact Information

Phone

316-267-1281

Fax

316-267-4086

Email

Send email to Terry L. Unruh


Office Information
Terry L. Unruh
Member
 833 North Waco, P.O. Box 830,
Wichita, KS 67201

Loading...

Logo
Sherwood, Harper, Dakan, Unruh & Pratt, LC (Wichita, Kansas)

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.