John R Williams

John R Williams

2.3
Rating: 4.9

Licensed for 58 years

Criminal defense Lawyer at New Haven, CT
Practice Areas: Criminal Defense, Civil Rights, Appeals, Employment & Labor

51 Elm St Ste 409, New Haven, CT

This lawyer was disciplined by a state licensing authority in 2019
See Details

About John

Biography

Fees and Rates

Cost

Hourly Rates

$ 500-600 per hour


Payment Methods

  • Cash
  • Check
  • Credit Card

Looking for an attorney? Avvo can help.

search module image

Search our directory

Quickly connect with top attorneys through our legal directory to get help with your legal issue.

chat module image

Avvo's live chat agents can help coordinate a consultation with a local attorney.

Chat with a live agent who can match you with the right attorney for your legal needs.

Chat with

Licenses

Licensed in Connecticut for 58 years

State: Connecticut

Acquired: 1968

Active

Lawyer disciplined by state licensing authority in 2019

Location

John R Williams and Associates, LLC

51 Elm St Ste 409, New Haven, CT, 06510-2049

Ad

Transform legal challenges into solutions.

Connect now to review your situation.

The Avvo Rating explained

display-bg

The Avvo Rating explained

John R Williams's Reviews

Avvo Review Score

2.3 /5.0

12 Client Reviews

Filter Avvo Reviews (12) Refine reviews to match your needs. Use the filters to quickly surface reviews that align with your case or priorities.

Showing 1 - 4 of 4 reviews | Staff & Support

Posted by anonymous | January 06, 2022 | Hired Attorney | Lawsuits & Disputes

thief and liar surrepitious

never read the complaint did not explore the evidence that i presented to him was dis-bared several times for invidious behavior. this guy is out for retainers only never communicates and does not have qualified associates

Posted by Mark | August 15, 2019 | Hired Attorney | Litigation

Disassociated Team, No attention to detail.

I hired Williams with a $5,000 retainer. The initial attempt in J R Williams filing of my complaint was totally in error and inconsistent with the 5-1/2 page complaint of facts that he was given. I was able to intervene and stop the filing, directing the firm to the facts that were already presente...d to them and that I had discussed with John in his office before rendering payment. There was another attorney that I had consulted earlier that had done some preliminary work on my case with discovery. Her work was impressive in my opinion, but she felt she lacked the financial resources to proceed. Maybe the funds presented to J R Williams would have been better spent with her efforts. Going into the deposition process, long after I had completed a 33 page interrogatory, I noted that the opposing party was not making any reference to the material that I presented during the interrogatory filings. Half way through the deposition, I asked John's associate if the opposing party had possession of the interrogatory. He said that apparently not and that he would look into it. In that moment I began to understand that none of my interrogatory would be allowed, because the time of discovery had long closed. I presented the material in a timely fashion, it was just not passed onto the opposing party. After my being deposed, I asked the William's associate, when the defendants would be deposed. I was told that they would not be deposed, with the comment that, "We don't show our hand." Hmm.....don't fill your hand, don't show your hand sounded like a peculiar position to me. J R continually assured me that there would be no position of the defendants to win on summary judgement. One day I got an email, with the subject, "Bad News." My case was lost in summary judgement. I requested that J R send me his firm's response to the defendant's request for summary judgement. As the defendants were never deposed and my interrogatory was not transferred to the opposing party during discovery, there was miserable little for a proper and diligent response. Whoever wrote the response for J R's firm was not at all skilled, and I wondered if an 8th grader could have presented a better response. In my opinion, a better heading for, "J R Williams and Associates," would be J R Williams and the Disassociated." Don't believe the hype of days gone by or get taken in my what seems to present a well managed law firm. Perhaps those days are passed?

Posted by anonymous | February 27, 2019 | Lawsuits & Disputes

Client Review

Took our money and never appeared in court on our behalf- he sent an "associate" who was totally unfamiliar with the case. Of many poor attorneys in CT, he is among the worst! BEWARE!!!

Posted by Sean | February 27, 2019

Highly Recommended

John R. Williams & Associates is the firm to choose if you need effective representation. Mr. Williams personally oversees your case and he and his associates will work very hard on your behalf. His rates are reasonable and once he is retained you do not have to worry about anything. I would highl...y recommend this firm to anyone who needs a law firm to advocate on their behalf.

See All Client Reviews

John R Williams's Lawyer Endorsements

Endorse John

No Endorsement Data Available Yet
This attorney hasn't received any attorney endorsements recently on Avvo.

No Endorsement Data Available Yet
This attorney hasn't created any attorney endorsements recently on Avvo.

Experience

Rating:  4.9 (Concern)

Professional misconduct

This lawyer was disciplined by a state licensing authority in 2019.

Reprimand issued in CT, 2019

updated on 08/19/2019

A reprimand is an order from the Statewide Grievance Committee after it has found that an attorney has engaged in ethical misconduct. If an attorney receives more than 3 reprimands in 5 years, a presentment must be filed against the attorney so the Superior Court can decide if more serious discipline should be ordered.

Suspension issued in CT, 2017

updated on 11/28/2017

This means the attorney lost his or her license to practice law for a period of time. The attorney typically returns to practicing law when the suspension expires.

Honors

2018

AV Rated, Martindale-Hubbell

Work Experience

1980 - 1990

Adjunct Faculty, Yale Law School

Associations

National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers

Life Member

Connecticut Criminal Defense Lawyers Association

Founding Member

1997 - 1998

Association of Trial Lawyers of America

Chair, Civil Rights Section

Sample of Legal Cases

Drimal v. Tai, 786 F.3d 219 (2d Cir. 2015)

Suit for unlawful wiretapping by FBI agents remanded for trial.

Sousa v. Roque, 578 F.3d 164 (2d Cir. 2009)

Plaintiff prevailed.

Bhatia v. Debek, 287 Conn. 397, 948 A.2d 1009 (2008)

Plaintiff prevailed.

Lopes v. Farmer, 286 Conn. 384, 944 A.2d 921 (2008)

Plaintiff prevailed.

Doe ex rel. A.N. v. East Haven Board of Education, 430 F. Supp. 2d 54 (D. Conn.), aff'd 200 Fed. Appx. 46 (2d Cir. 2006)

Plaintiff prevailed.

DeLeo v. Nusbaum, 263 Conn. 588, 821 A.2d 744 (2003)

Plaintiff prevailed

Porter v. Nussle, 534 U.S. 516 (2002)

Second Circuit ruling reversed

Zavatsky v. Anderson, 130 F. Supp. 2d 349 (D. Conn. 2001)

Plaintiff prevailed.

State v. DeAngelo, 2000 WL 973104 (Conn. Super. 2000)

Defendant acquitted on grounds of ingestion of prescription medication.

Bell v. Board of Education, 55 Conn. App. 400, 739 A.2d 321 (1999)

Plaintiffs prevailed.1

Drumm v. Brown, 245 Conn. 657, 716 A.2d 50 (1998)

Plaintiff prevailed.

Delahunty v. Massachusetts Mutual Life Ins. Co., 236 Conn. 582, 674 A.2d 1290 (1996)

Plaintiff prevailed.

DeLaurentis v. City of New Haven, 220 Conn. 225, 597 A.2d 807 (1991)

Plaintiff prevailed.

Ruggiero v. Krzeminski, 928 F.2d 558 (2d Cir. 1991)

Plaintiff prevailed

Dobosz v. Walsh, 892 F.2d 1135 (2d Cir. 1989)

Substantial damages award to plaintiff affirmed.

Miller v. Angliker, 848 F.2d 1312 (2d Cir. 1988)

Prisoner released from custody.

Haskins v. Manson, 791 F.2d 255 (2d Cir. 1986)

Conviction vacated.

Gagnon v. Ball, 696 F.2d 17 (2d Cir. 1982)

Plaintiff prevailed

See More Legal Cases

Education

1967

Georgetown University Law Center

JD - Juris Doctor

1963

Harvard College

A.B.

Publications

2003

Suffolk Journal of Trial & Appellate Advocacy Beyone Police Misconduct and False Arrest: Expanding the Scope of 42 USC 1983 Litigation

1996

Convicting the Innocent The Ben Miller Frame-Up

1988

Civil Rights Litigation and Attorney Fees A Practitioner's Guide to Representing Plaintiffs in Section 1983 Litigation

1968

Languages

English

Spanish

Activity

Avvo Rating

Our Rating is calculated using information the lawyer has included on their profile in addition to the information we collect from state bar associations and other organizations that license legal professionals. Attorneys who claim their profiles and provide Avvo with more information tend to have a higher rating than those who do not.

What determines Avvo Rating?
  • Experience & background Years licensed, work experience, education
  • Legal community recognition Peer endorsements, associations, awards
  • Legal thought leadership Publications, speaking engagements
  • Discipline
    This lawyer was disciplined by a state licensing authority in 2019
    Disciplinary information may not be comprehensive, or updated. We recommend that you always check a lawyer's disciplinary status with their respective state bar association before hiring them.
Avvo Rating Levels
10.0 - 9.0 Superb8.9 - 8.0 Excellent7.9 - 7.0 Very Good6.9 - 6.0 Good5.9 - 5.0 Average4.9 - 4.0 Concern3.9 - 3.0 Caution2.9 - 2.0 Strong Caution1.9 - 1.0 Extreme Caution