Showing top 10 Litigation attorneys
in Phoenix, Arizona near ZIP code 85004.
Click any pin to view lawyer details, ratings, and contact information.
Gold pins indicate top-rated lawyers.
Litigation Case Statistics Overview
Litigation Case Timeline
Litigation cases in Phoenix typically resolve in 9 to 30 months, depending on complexity, court schedules, and whether the case settles early or proceeds to trial.
Phoenix Court Backlog
The estimated backlog reflects the number of pending litigation cases in Maricopa County courts, which can impact scheduling and resolution times.
Litigation Phoenix Filing Volume
Phoenix courts see an estimated 350 to 600 new litigation cases filed monthly, based on recent public court data.
Litigation Case Outcomes
Approximately 35% of cases resolve pre-litigation, 25% after filing but before trial, and about 10% succeed at trial, with outcomes varying by case type and representation.
FAQs - Litigation Lawyers in 85004 city Phoenix
How many Administrative Law, Civil Rights, Health Care, Landlord & Tenant, Employment, Litigation lawyers actively serve residents of Phoenix, Arizona (85004)?
Approximately 24 licensed attorneys focus on Administrative Law, Civil Rights, Health Care, Landlord & Tenant, Employment, Litigation across Phoenix, Arizona (85004). Most matters are filed through the Arizona District Court, where local rules shape timelines and filing steps.
How long do Administrative Law, Civil Rights, Health Care, Landlord & Tenant, Employment, Litigation matters usually take in courts near Phoenix (85004)?
Administrative Law, Civil Rights, Health Care, Landlord & Tenant, Employment, Litigation cases in Phoenix, Arizona usually take around 5-8 months depending on complexity and the Arizona District Court docket.
Which local court most often hears Administrative Law, Civil Rights, Health Care, Landlord & Tenant, Employment, Litigation cases for people living in Phoenix, Arizona?
Residents of Phoenix typically see Administrative Law, Civil Rights, Health Care, Landlord & Tenant, Employment, Litigation filings handled by the Arizona District Court. Proximity to 85004 helps with quick submissions and clerk communications.
Do attorneys around 85004 offer a free first consultation for Administrative Law, Civil Rights, Health Care, Landlord & Tenant, Employment, Litigation?
About 56% of firms near ZIP 85004 offer a free first consultation for Administrative Law, Civil Rights, Health Care, Landlord & Tenant, Employment, Litigation, so you can compare strategy and fit before committing.
Practice Areas: Appeals, Business, Corporate & Incorporation, Family, Alimony, Administrative Law, Real Estate, Commercial, Lawsuits & Disputes, Litigation
Roger Cohen has over 40 years’ experience as a business attorney, representing clients in both litigation and transactions. He has a deep knowledge and understanding of commercial law and the litigation process and is a forceful and effective advocate for his clients. Roger’s experience as a transactional attorney adds value in the litigation setting, as he can relate the documentation process to issues that arise in business and commercial disputes. Conversely, his knowledge and skill as a litigator affords him an advantage in negotiating and drafting settlement agreements with maximum protections to his clients. This unique blend of expertise is particularly useful in workout representation.. He has long-standing relationships with business clients in a variety of industries, providing business counseling, transactional assistance and litigation services. For over 30 years, he has represented an independent escrow company, successfully defending numerous claims asserting alleged breaches of contract and fiduciary duties. He acted as Arizona lead counsel in an 18-year multiple state legal battle arising out of a jojoba investment scheme, and was litigation counsel for the receiver of a group of lenders taken over as the result of a Ponzi scheme investigation. Roger has obtained favorable results, through trial or settlement, for clients in a variety of matters, including legal and accounting malpractice, shareholder and partner disputes, employment contract and restrictive covenant disputes, bankruptcy adversary proceedings, and complex collections.. Roger has published articles and spoken on a variety of topics, including the Arizona homestead and judgment lien statutes, Uniform Commercial Code Articles 2 (sales) and 9 (secured transactions), attorney conflicts and misconduct, bankruptcy appeals, and civil procedure. His article “Foreign Judgments and Community Property” was published in Arizona Attorney in November, 2009 and he co-authored “The Top 50 Leading Cases that Shaped Life and Law in Arizona’s First 100 Years” published in Arizona Attorney in February 2012. He is co-author of a chapter of the recent Thompson Reuters publication, “Inside the Minds: Strategies for Consumer Bankruptcy Appeals”.. A former law clerk to the Honorable Duke Cameron, former Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court, Roger has substantial experience as an appellate practitioner, having supervised and written numerous appellate briefs and argued cases in the Arizona Supreme Court, Arizona Court of Appeals, California Court of Appeals, and Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. His published decisions include: Phares v. Nutter, 125 Ariz. 291, 609 P.2d 561 (Ariz. Supreme Court 1980) (established right to debtor to seek relief from judgment registered under the Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act); Corporate Inv. Business Brokers v. Melcher, 824 F.2d 786 (9th Cir. 1987) (reversing District Court and holding that Colorado franchisee was subject to jurisdiction in Arizona in suit brought by franchisor); Mid Kansas Federal Sav. and Loan Ass’n of Wichita v. Dynamic Development Corp., 167 Ariz. 122, 804 P.2d 1310 (Ariz. Supreme Court 1991) (counsel for amicus curiae Southwest Savings & Loan Assoc.); Anderson v. Contes, 212 Ariz. 122, 128 P.3d 230 (Ariz. App. 2006); Austin Shea (Arizona) 7th Street and Van Buren, L.L.C. v. City of Phoenix, 213 Ariz. 385, 142 P.3d 693 (Ariz. App. 2006) and Rackmaster Systems, Inc. v. Maderia, 219 Ariz. 60, 193 P.3d 314 (Ariz. App. 2008).
One North Central Suite 900 , Phoenix , Arizona 85004
Practice Areas: Employment & Labor , Health Care & Hospitalization, Insurance , Personal Injury, Professional Malpractice, Regulatory , Transportation , Government Contracts, Government Contracts, Transportation, Employment & Labor, Federal Regulation, Medical Malpractice, Slip and Fall Accident, Class Action, Litigation
Practice Areas: Real Estate, Personal Injury, Wrongful Death, Commercial, Litigation
Tom Moring’s practice emphasizes complex real estate and commercial disputes, creditor’s rights, tort litigation and collections matters. Mr. Moring has extensive experience in managing and performing all aspects of litigation from initial investigation through discovery to trial. He began his career at one of the largest and most prestigious law firms in the country, where he worked for and earned a place among some of the top litigation attorneys in Arizona. Throughout Mr. Moring’s career, he has been involved in a wide variety of civil litigation matters, most as lead counsel.
Practice Areas: Construction , Corporate , Landlord & Tenant, Telecommunications , Construction & Development, Construction & Development, Construction & Development, Real Estate, Litigation
1850 N. Central Ave Suite 2400 , Phoenix , Arizona 85004
Practice Areas: Appellate , ERISA, Insurance , Personal Injury, Securities , Litigation
My team and I represent victims who are injured or families who have lost loved ones in accidents caused by someone else's mistakes or wrongdoing. I have completed over $25 million in settlements for my clients. I am rated as a top 50 Super Lawyer in Arizona by Southwest Superlawyers Magzine and maintain a preeminent AV rating. My team and I pride ourselves on winning cases at the highest possible level and maintaining open, direct, and constant communication with our clients.
Disclaimer: This content is based on aggregated public information and estimated market trends. It is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
