John C. Collins

Attorney in Wilmington, NC
Instructor: Business Law, Cape Fear Community College, 1980-1982; Traffic Offenses and Misdemeanors, Practical Skills Course, North Carolina Bar Association, 1981-1990 and 2000-2007. Assistant District Attorney, Fifth Judicial District, 1979-1982.

Areas of Law

  • Criminal Law
  • Traffic Law
  • Misdemeanors
  • DWI Defense
  • Felonies


Overall Client Rating

in Criminal Law
5.0 out of 5.0

Communication Ability
Quality of Service
Value for Money

  • Data based on 1 reviews
  • Recommended by 1 Client
  • Last reviewed on 04/15/13
Posted by a Consumer on 04/15/13
5.0 out of 5.0
I own a real estate company in business 40 years, I deal with a lot of attorneys, I am on A bank board in Raleigh, President of a Power Company and I deal with a lot of attorneys. John Collins represented my son in a traffic violation and Mr. Collins was superior in his trial skills, his knowledge, and his professionalism is beyond reproach.. He was honest and straight forward and extremely intelligent and presented our case without fault. I would highly recommend him to the general public.
Report abuse

Experience & Credentials



Admission Details

Admitted in 1976, North Carolina and U.S. District Court, Eastern District of North Carolina

Law School Attended

Wake Forest University
Class of 1976

University Attended

Duke University
Class of 1972

Birth Information

Born in 1950
New York, N.Y., September 18, 1950

Associations & Memberships

New Hanover County (President, 1989-1990 and 2005-2006) and North Carolina (Member, Practical Training Committee, 1984-1990) Bar Associations; Fifth Judicial District (President, 1987-1989; Cha... More

Contact Information




Send email to John C. Collins

Office Information
John C. Collins
 515 Princess Street, P.O. Box 121,
Wilmington, NC 28402-0121


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.