Client Reviews
Not yet reviewed
No professional misconduct found.
Overview
Practice Areas
|
|
Fees and Payment Types
|
Fees
Fixed (Sometimes), Free Consultation (30 minutes), Hourly ($100-$175/hour), Pro Bono (5%), Retainer (Sometimes)
Payment types
Cash, Check, Credit Card
|
Contact Information
|
|
About Me
Photos (0)
Videos (0)
|
I recently left the employment of the County Attorney in Schenectady County and returned to private practice. I opened my office on Clinton Street, sharing... more
|
References
Client Reviews
|
How would you rate this lawyer?
If you're a current or former client, share your thoughts (anonymously, if you prefer). Would you recommend this lawyer to other clients?
Review this lawyer
|
Peer Endorsements
|
Endorse a fellow lawyer, get more visits to your profile
In addition to providing a simple way to express your gratitude to fellow lawyers, any time you add an endorsement to a peer's profile, a link to your profile will appear on it.
Endorse this lawyer
|
Résumé
License
|
27 years since Deanna L. Siegel was first licensed to practice law.
| State |
License status |
Year acquired |
Last updated by Avvo |
| New York |
Due to reregister within 30 days of birthday
|
1985 |
05/21/2011 |
We have not found any instances of professional misconduct for this lawyer.
|
Work Experience
|
| Position |
Duration |
|
Deputy County Attorney at
County Attorney with Schenectady County Department of Social Services
|
1987–2008
|
|
Associate Attorney at
Eidens and Dickson
|
1985–1987
|
|
Clerk at
Fairleigh and Dickenson and Schenectady Federal Savings Bank
|
1983–1985
|
See all 3 job entries
|
Education
|
| School |
Major |
Degree |
Graduated |
| Vermont Law School |
Law |
Juris Doctor |
1983 |
| University of Buffalo |
Political Science |
Bachelor of Arts |
1980 |
|
Associations
|
| Position |
Association Name |
Duration |
|
Schenectady County Bar Association |
2000-present
|
| Chairman |
Duanesburg Republican Party |
1995-present
|
|
Portfolio
Contribution
|
Reputation Level 13
| Answers: |
218 |
Legal Answers |
|
1 |
Best Answer |
|
108 |
Answers marked as good |
| Guides: |
0 |
Legal Guides |
|
0 |
Staff Picks |
View all contributions
|
Cases
|
Outcome: The Court denied the father's Art. 78 Application
Outcome: The Court overturned the decision to return child.
Outcome: The Court sustained the lower Court's ruling
See all cases
|
|
