×
Go back to Martindale-Avvo ➔

Sanders & Parks Professional CorporationPresident and Managing Shareholder
Mr. Mark G Worischeck

Mr. Mark G Worischeck

Not yet reviewed

3030 North Third Street, Suite 1300, Phoenix, AZ 85012

Aviation Law, Bad Faith, Business, Construction & Commercial Law and 14 more

About Mr. Mark G Worischeck

Mr. Mark G Worischeck is a lawyer practicing aviation law, bad faith, business, construction & commercial law and 14 other areas of law. Mark received a B.S. degree from University of Arizona in 1983, and has been licensed for 40 years. Mark practices at Sanders & Parks Professional Corporation in Phoenix, AZ.

Mr. Mark G Worischeck (Phoenix, Arizona)

Awards

AV Preeminent Peer Rated
This elite award is granted to attorneys who have been recognized by their peers for their very high ethical standards, with an average peer review score of 4.5 or higher.
Martindale-Hubbell Peer AV

Client Champion Awards

Client Champion awards recognize those attorneys who excel at service as affirmed by their clients. The awards, based on the quantity and quality of an attorney’s Martindale-Hubbell client reviews, demonstrate an ongoing commitment to delivering excellent client service. Award recipients stand out from their peers with a platinum, gold or silver icon.

Champion Badge Silver

At least three reviews and a score of 4.0 or higher.

Champion Badge Gold

At least six reviews and a score of 4.2 or higher.

Champion Badge Platinum

At least ten reviews and a score of 4.5 or higher.

Martindale Peer Awards

A lawyer who receives a minimum threshold of qualifying responses from fellow attorneys can qualify for one of three prestigious Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings:

Martindale-Hubbell Peer AV Preeminent Rating

AV Preeminent®: The highest peer rating standard. This rating signifies a large number of the lawyer’s peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence for their legal knowledge, communication skills and ethical standards.

Mr. Mark G Worischeck got this award in 2021

Martindale-Hubbell Peer Distinguished Rating

Distinguished: An excellent rating for a lawyer with some experience. This rating indicates the attorney is widely respected by their peers for high professional achievement and ethical standards.

Martindale-Hubbell Peer Notable Rating

Notable: This rating indicates that the lawyer has been recognized by a large number of their peers for strong ethical standards.

Avvo Awards

Avvo Top Contributor

Avvo Top Contributor: The Avvo Top Contributor Award is granted to attorneys who have earned significant contribution points in a given year on our sister site, Avvo.com. Contribution points are earned by answering questions in Q&A, publishing Legal Guides, and other useful contributions to the Avvo community.

Avvo Client Choice

Avvo Client’s Choice: The Avvo Client's Choice Award Badge is granted to attorneys with a significant number of 4+ star reviews in a given year.

Reviews for Mr. Mark G Worischeck

This lawyer does not have any client reviews on Lawyers.com yet

Write a Review

Services

Areas of Law

  • Aviation Law
  • Litigation 1
    • Civil Litigation
  • Construction Law
  • Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility 1
    • Legal Malpractice
  • Products Liability
  • Other 12
    • Bad Faith
    • Business, Construction & Commercial Law
    • Coverage Counsel
    • Directors & Officers
    • Employment & Labor Law
    • Insurance Agents / Brokers
    • Insurance Law & Litigation
    • Mediation, Arbitration, ADR
    • Personal Injury / Tort
    • Personal Injury & Wrongful Death
    • Professional Liability Litigation
    • Public Entity & Municipal Defense

Practice Details

  • Payment Information
    Payment & Cost Features
    Free initial consultation
    Fixed hourly rates
    Fixed fees available
  • Firm Information
    Position
    President and Managing Shareholder
    Firm Name
    Sanders & Parks Professional Corporation
  • Representative Cases & Transactions
    Cases
    Reported Decisions: Saenz v. State Fund Workers' Compensation Insurance, 189 Ariz. 471, 943 P.2d 831 (App. 1997).
    Yslava v. Hughes Aircraft Company, 188 Ariz. 380, 936 P.2d 1274 (1997).
    Jane Doe One v. Garcia, 5 F. Supp.2d 767 (D. Ariz. 1998).
    State Compensation Fund v. Yellow Cab Company of Phoenix, 197 Ariz. 120, 3 P.3d 1040 (App. 1999).
    Stout v. State Compensation Fund, 197 Ariz. 238, 3 P.3d 1158 (App. 2000).
    McEvoy v. Aerotek, Inc ., 201 Ariz. 200, 34 P.3d 979 (App. 2001).
    Stout v. State Compensation Fund, 202 Ariz. 300, 44 P.3d 178 (App. 2002).
    Daly v. Royal Insurance Company of America, 2002 WL 1768887 (D. Ariz. July 17, 2002).
    Alanco Technologies, Inc., et al v. Carolina Casualty Insurance Co ., 2004 WL 5653220 (D. Ariz. Sept. 20, 2004).
    Alanco Technologies, Inc., et al v. Carolina Casualty Insurance Co ., 2005 WL 6242305 (D. Ariz. Oct. 31, 2005).
    Alanco Technologies, Inc., et al v. Carolina Casualty Insurance Co ., 2006 WL 1371633 (D. Ariz. May 17, 2006).
    Biltmore Associates, L.L.C. v. Twin City Fire Insurance Co ., 2006 WL 2091667 (D. Ariz. July 21, 2006) (represented Carolina Casualty Insurance Company).
    Biltmore Associates, L.L.C. v. Twin City Fire Insurance C o., 2007 WL 496766 (D. Ariz. Feb. 13, 2007) (Represented Carolina Casualty Insurance Company).
    Biltmore Associates, L.L.C. v. Twin City Fire Insurance Co ., 2007 WL 1412536 (D. Ariz. May 11, 2007) (represented Carolina Casualty Insurance Company).
    Biltmore Associates, L.L.C. v. Twin City Fire Insurance Co ., 2007 WL 2422053 (D. Ariz. Aug. 22, 2007) (represented Carolina Casualty Insurance Company).
    Biltmore Assocs., L.L.C. v. Twin City Fire Ins. Co., 572 F.3d 663 (9th Cir. Ariz. 2009) (represented Carolina Casualty Insurance Company).
    Canyon Ambulatory Surgery Center
    El Dorado Surgery Center, LLP v. SCF Arizona, 225 Ariz. 414, 239 P.3d 733 (App. 2010).
    Lee v. City of Kingman, et al., No. 3:14-CV-08218 JWS, 2015 WL 5013876 (D. Ariz. Aug. 25, 2015) (Dismissal of client City of Kingman).
    Lee v. City of Kingman, et al., No. 3:14-CV-08218 JWS, 2015 WL 5648027 (D. Ariz. Sept. 25, 2015) (Dismissal of client Mohave County Fair Association)
    Yahweh v. City of Phoenix, 400 P.3d 445 (App.2017).

Experience

  • Bar Admission & Memberships
    Admissions
    1986, Arizona
    1986, U.S. District Court, District of Arizona, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit and U.S. Supreme Court
    Memberships

    Professional Associations

    •State Bar of Arizona
    •Maricopa County Bar Association
    •American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA)
    •Arizona Association of Defense Counsel
    •Defense Research Institute
    •Arizona Insurance Institute
    •Aviation Insurance Association (AIA)
    •Lawyer-Pilots Bar Association, Panel Attorney
    •Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), Panel Attorney
    •Claims & Litigation Management Alliance

  • Education & Certifications
    Law School
    Washington University at St. Louis
    Class of 1986
    J.D.
    Other Education
    University of Arizona
    Class of 1983
    B.S.
    Finance

    University of Arizona
    Class of 1983
    B.S.
    with distinction

Mr. Mark G Worischeck

President and Managing Shareholder at Sanders & Parks Professional Corporation
Not yet reviewed

3030 North Third Street, Suite 1300Phoenix, AZ 85012U.S.A.

Show on map

Lawyers Nearby

Joseph D. Lento
Pro
Joseph D. Lento
4.9
390
Aviation Law lawyer
215-792-2059
View Profile
no photo
Pro
Susan Ellen Chetlin
5.0
1
Aviation Law lawyer
602-388-1847
View Profile
Michael Pearson
Pro
Michael Pearson
4.9
9
Aviation Law lawyer

Free Consultation

623-304-5199
View Profile
Joseph Ramos
Pro
Joseph Ramos
4.7
15
Aviation Law lawyer

Free Consultation

720-894-3251
View Profile
John Patrick Torgenson
Pro
John Patrick Torgenson
5.0
27
Aviation Law lawyer
602-898-0070
View Profile

Email Mr. Mark G Worischeck

Case type is required.
I am is required.
First name is required.
Last name is required.
A valid zip code is required.
Country is required.
State is required.
A valid city is required.
A valid email address is required.
A valid phone number is required.
Message is required.
0/1000 characters

By clicking the Submit button, you agree to the Terms of Use, Supplemental Terms and Privacy Policy. You also consent to be contacted at the phone number you provided, including by autodials, text messages and/or pre-recorded calls, from Lawyers.com and its affiliates and from or on behalf of attorneys you request or contact through this site. Consent is not a condition of purchase.

You should not send any sensitive or confidential information through this site. Emails sent through this site do not create an attorney-client relationship and may not be treated as privileged or confidential. The lawyer or law firm you are contacting is not required to, and may choose not to, accept you as a client. The internet is not necessarily secure and emails sent though this site could be intercepted or read by third parties.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA. See Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

Thank you! Your message has been successfully sent.

For your records, a copy of this email has been sent to test@test.com.

Summary of Your Message
Case Type:
I am a/an:
First Name:
Last Name:
City:
Zip Code or Postal Code:
State:
Country:
Phone Number:
Message:
Return to Profile Reset Form
Lawyers.com Client Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Client Review Ratings™ display reviews submitted by individuals who have either hired or consulted the lawyers or law firms.

The Client Review Rating score is determined through the aggregation of validated responses. People who submit reviews are either individuals who consulted with the lawyer/law firm or who hired the lawyer/law firm and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. Reviewers can be anyone who consults or hires a lawyer including in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners, and private individuals.

Martindale-Hubbell validates that a reviewer is a person with a valid email address. As part of the review process, respondents must affirm that they have had an initial consultation, are currently a client or have been a client of the lawyer or law firm identified, although Martindale-Hubbell cannot confirm the lawyer/client relationship as it is often confidential. The content of the responses is entirely from reviewers.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review. For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Client Review Ratings, please visit our Client Review Page

Martindale Peer Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ are the gold standard in attorney ratings, and have been for more than a century. These ratings indicate attorneys who are widely respected by their peers for their ethical standards and legal expertise in a specific area of practice.

The Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings process is the gold standard due to its objectivity and comprehensiveness. Lawyers solicited for peer reviews include both those selected by the attorney being reviewed and lawyers independently selected by Martindale-Hubbell. All reviewers are verified as attorneys through Martindale-Hubbell’s extensive attorney database. Only attorneys practicing at least three years and receiving a sufficient number of reviews from non-affiliated attorneys are eligible to receive a Rating.

What are the different Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings?*

• AV Preeminent®: The highest peer rating standard. This rating signifies that a large number of the lawyer’s peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence for their legal knowledge, communication skills and ethical standards.

• Distinguished: An excellent rating for a lawyer with some experience. This rating indicates the attorney is widely respected by their peers for high professional achievement and ethical standards.

• Notable: This rating indicates that the lawyer has been recognized by a large number of their peers for strong ethical standards.

Lawyers who have received peer reviews after 2009 will display more detailed information, including practice areas, summary ratings, detailed numeric ratings and written feedback (if available). Details for individual reviews received before 2009 are not displayed.

Attorneys that receive reviews from their peers, but not a sufficient number to establish a Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rating, will have those reviews display on our websites.

For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings™, please visit our Ratings Page on Martindale.com and our Frequently Asked Questions