Keith L Altman

PRO

Keith L Altman

also known as K Altman Law

3.2
Rating: 6.9

Licensed for 17 years

Education Lawyer at Farmington Hills, MI
Practice Areas: Education, Class Action, Civil Rights ... +4 more

30474 Fox Club Drive, Farmington Hills, MI

Virtual Consultation Available

About Keith

Biography

A seasoned lawyer specializing in student defense, Title IX and complex litigation.

We Take Tough Cases That Other Law Firms Avoid!

We Take Tough Cases That Other Law Firms Avoid!

We Take Tough Cases That Other Law Firms Avoid!

We Take Tough Cases That Other Law Firms Avoid!

A seasoned lawyer specializing in student defense, Title IX and complex litigation.

We Take Tough Cases That Other Law Firms Avoid!

Practice Areas

7

Practice Areas

Education 50%

Specialist in School Law and Title IX

9 years | 300 cases

50%
Civil Rights 10%

20 cases

10%
Class Action 10%

18 years | 8 cases

10%
Consumer Protection 10%

10 cases

10%
Litigation 10%

20 cases

10%
Defective and Dangerous Products 5%

Specialize in complex pharmaceutical torts and adverse events due to defective products. Also specialize in all aspects of electronic discovery and forensic data analysis

18 years | 100 cases

5%
Employment and Labor 5%

5%

Fees and Rates

We have not found any cost information for this lawyer

Awards

Top Contributor
Top Contributor
2024 2023
Client's Choice
Client's Choice
2023 2022

Licenses

Licensed in Michigan for 9 years

State: Michigan

Acquired: 2017

Active in Good Standing

No misconduct found

Licensed in California for 17 years

State: California

Acquired: 2008

Active

No misconduct found

Licensed in Illinois

State: Illinois

Active Out of State Lawyer - Permitted to Practice

No misconduct found

Location

The Law Office of Keith Altman, PLLC

30474 Fox Club Drive, Farmington Hills, MI, 48331

kaltmanlaw.com

Keith L Altman's Reviews

Avvo Review Score

3.2 /5.0

49 Client Reviews

Showing 31 - 35 of 49 reviews

Posted by Travis | January 16, 2026

Not organized

Scheduled consultation with one attorney at 10:00a, was rescheduled with a different attorney at 3:30p. Was texted 4 times we are running 5 minutes behind consecutively. Called and got refunded for my consultation.

Keith Altman

Replied last March 09, 2026

hank you, Travis, for sharing your feedback. I am sorry to hear that your consultation experience did not meet expectations. In our effort to provide excellent service, our attorneys sometimes need to move quickly to address client concerns, and on occasion consultations run longer than anticipated in order to provide the best value, which can impact scheduling. We take feedback seriously and would appreciate the opportunity to learn more. Please contact us directly at [email protected] so we can address your concerns. – The K Altman Law Team

Posted by Stidham | November 25, 2025 | Hired Attorney

Scammed out of $16,000

I paid K Altman Law $16,000 for an expulsion and Title IX attorney. After taking my payment, communication almost completely stopped. I went six weeks with no updates, no guidance, and no response at all. Then on Aug 19, I finally got an email saying the lawyer I hired, Amelia Lafont, was “no long...er with the firm” and they were still trying to figure out what happened with my case. I was never notified she left. No replacement attorney. No transition. No plan. No work product. To this day, I have not been refunded the $16,000, even though I did not receive the representation I paid for. I’ve now filed a formal complaint with the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission and am submitting a claim to the Michigan Client Protection Fund. This whole experience has been extremely upsetting and unprofessional, and I don’t want anyone else to go through this.

Keith Altman

Replied last May 30, 2026

We take your comments seriously and regret that you feel dissatisfied with your experience.   If you file a grievance with the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission we will cooperate fully with the Attorney Grievance Commission and the Michigan Client Protection Fund so that those bodies will have access to the full record, and evaluate your concerns in the appropriate confidential setting. Because of our professional obligations, this will be our only public comment on your matter.

Posted by anonymous | August 26, 2025

Professional Review of Legal Services – Disappointing Consultation Experience

I was disappointed with the overall consultation process at the Law Offices of K. Altman. After submitting an online inquiry, I was contacted by the intake team, who requested specific details about my legal matter. I provided a thorough summary, and was later informed that my case had been sent to t...he legal team for review. Shortly afterward, I received an invitation to schedule a consultation. Initially hesitant due to negative reviews I had read, I delayed responding. The intake team followed up with another email a week later, and I asked a clarifying question before proceeding. They answered promptly, and I appreciated their responsiveness. Despite not being ready to move forward at that point, they later contacted me by phone to reiterate that the legal team had reviewed my case and believed they might be able to assist. After confirming that another attorney I was considering could not handle my case, I decided to proceed with the consultation with Mr. Altman’s firm. Unfortunately, the experience was disappointing. By the time Mr. Altman joined the call, it was clear he had already made up his mind not to take the case. The consultation lasted approximately 15 minutes, during which Mr. Altman did most of the talking. He asked only three brief questions—two of which were yes/no questions based on assumptions he had already made (and which turned out to be correct). I want to emphasize that I am not upset that Mr. Altman declined to take my case; I respect his professional judgment. What I find troubling is that I was charged \$350 for a consultation that appeared to be a mere formality. Given that the legal team had already reviewed the case and concluded it was not one they intended to pursue, it feels misleading to have continued with the paid consultation. Had the purpose of the consultation been for Mr. Altman to hear my case for the first time and then determine he could not assist, I would have understood the fee. However, it was clear from the outset of our call that a decision had already been made. In hindsight, I feel misled by the persistent follow-ups from the intake team and the implication that there was potential for assistance. It would have been more transparent—and far more professional—to inform me earlier that the firm had reviewed the matter but was not able to take the case, rather than inviting me to pay for a consultation that ultimately offered no value.

Keith Altman

Replied last August 27, 2025

Thank you for sharing your perspective. We respect your right to your opinion, but want to clarify how our process works and why we respectfully disagree with the characterization that the consultation was a “mere formality.” At K Altman Law, intake is an information-gathering and screening step—not legal advice or a commitment to representation. Our team collects key facts to see if your matter falls within our practice areas and whether a consultation with a senior attorney is appropriate. When we invite someone to a paid consultation, it is because, based on that screening, there may be a path for us to help—subject to the attorney’s independent assessment. We never promise representation before that meeting, and no engagement is accepted until both (1) the consultation occurs and (2) a written fee agreement is executed. Regarding the fee: it compensates you for reserved attorney time and expertise, not for a guaranteed outcome or a minimum number of minutes. Experienced counsel often focus on a small number of dispositive issues; if a threshold fact or rule is determinative, it is more ethical and efficient to address that directly rather than prolong a meeting. Brevity, in those instances, reflects professional judgment—not lack of attention. While you ultimately disagreed with the value received, the consultation provided an attorney’s analysis and a clear decision about next steps, which is its purpose. As to intake communications: follow-ups are meant to be helpful—many school matters are time-sensitive—and our messages consistently note that a consultation does not guarantee representation. We do not tell prospective clients their matter “will be taken” before attorney review. We take feedback seriously and continually refine our process to make expectations clearer. K Altman Law

Posted by anonymous | July 30, 2025 | Hired Attorney

STAY AWAY.

Rating: 0 out of 5 stars Review Title: Took My Money and Vanished I hired this lawyer for help with an appeal and paid $11,000. Aside from writing the appeal, they did nothing I was aware of. Communication completely stopped after I paid. No returned calls or emails — total silence until I termin...ated the agreement. They claimed they did other work, but never communicated that to me or provided any proof. They’re refusing a refund and using the signed contract to justify it. I feel completely scammed. Be very careful before hiring this attorney. Money does not match service rendered. They need to be reported to the bar association or disciplinary board. Life is already too hard for people to use their power to take from people that actually need help.

Keith Altman

Replied last August 04, 2025

We are sorry to hear that this reviewer feels dissatisfied with their experience and appreciate the opportunity to clarify the services provided. The reviewer retained K Altman Law for an expedited academic dismissal appeal with a 24‑hour deadline. During this critical timeframe, our team: Conducted a detailed consultation and reviewed the case and supporting materials; Researched the school’s academic integrity and appeal policies to confirm the proper procedure; Drafted and finalized a comprehensive appeal letter, which was submitted to meet the school’s deadline; and Provided instructions for submission, FERPA compliance, and outlined next steps, including preparation of a petition to stay dismissal and potential direct advocacy with the school’s General Counsel. These services were provided in accordance with the Student Defense Fee Agreement, which specifies that the flat fee is earned upon receipt and not contingent upon outcome. While we regret that the reviewer was disappointed with aspects of communication and that the initial appeal did not succeed, substantial professional services were rendered on an expedited basis, and the fee was fully earned. We are willing to help if the reviewer wishes to proceed to the next stage of the process. We sincerely wish them the best as they move forward. — K Altman Law

Posted by anonymous | May 12, 2025 | Hired Attorney

Paid $11,000 — No Legal Action Taken, Refund Tied to Silence

I signed a retainer agreement with K Altman Law on April 30 and paid $11,000. By May 6 — just one week later — I had already asked for a refund. Why? Because all they did was attend one meeting. No letters, no legal action, no strategy. They refused to send even a single demand letter. I had alrea...dy exhausted my university’s appeal and grievance channels when I hired them — they knew this was my last resort. They offered a partial refund of $3,000 — but only if I signed a non-disparagement agreement. I declined. They kept $8,000 for doing virtually nothing. Every legal document in my case — TRO, exhibits, filings — I had to write myself. This firm did not represent me. They abandoned me. Full story with all facts and documentation: https://medium.com/@a9551443/i-paid-11-000-to-a-disability-rights-lawyer-then-they-threatened-me-into-silence-a14e5846168d

Keith Altman

Replied last May 14, 2025

We are disappointed to read this review and must respectfully clarify several key facts that have been omitted or misrepresented. Ms. Liu initially contacted our office on April 23, 2025, and we began assisting her immediately, even before a signed agreement, because she was in clear distress. After reviewing the matter and initiating contact with her university, she asked us to pause the engagement on April 25. She then re-engaged us on April 28 and formally signed our standard flat-fee agreement on April 30, which explicitly excluded the filing of a lawsuit. Over the course of this short engagement—just six business days—our team: Conducted multiple consultations and reviewed all documents submitted by the client; Determined that the client had not sent her accommodation documentation to the appropriate university office; Attended a Zoom meeting with Ohio State University officials, which resulted in the school approving the client’s original request for remote testing; Drafted (80% complete) a comprehensive advocacy letter to the university and its General Counsel requesting alternative accommodations due to the client’s admission that she could not pass the course using the standard final; Maintained regular communication and attempted to guide the matter through a legally appropriate, good-faith process. While our efforts yielded positive results in a very short and high-pressure period, the client was dissatisfied that we would not immediately pursue a formal demand letter and Temporary Restraining Order (TRO)—legal actions that, under both law and ethics, would have been premature and unsupported at that stage. It’s important to note: The client terminated the engagement, not the firm. We offered a $3,000 partial refund in good faith, accompanied by a standard mutual release and non-disparagement agreement used widely across the legal profession. This was not “hush money”—it was a customary and ethical tool to resolve a prematurely ended engagement. The client’s portrayal that “nothing was done” ignores the factual record and the significant progress that was made. We hope she ultimately achieves the resolution she is seeking, and we stand by the work our team did—swiftly, strategically, and compassionately—within a difficult and short window.

See All Client Reviews

Keith L Altman's Lawyer Endorsements

Endorse Keith

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:  6.9 (Good)

Work Experience

2010 - Present

Owner / Senior Attorney, KAltman Law

Associations

2017 - Present

Michigan Bar Association

Member

2008 - Present

State Bar of California

Member

1997 - Present

American Association for Justice

Founder of the Electronic Litigation Group

Education

2008

Suny Ctr At Stony Brook

BS - Bachelor of Science

2008

Concord Law School

JD - Juris Doctor

Speaking Engagements

2020

AAJ Annual Convention

Electronic Discovery

2010

AAJ Annual Meeting

Electronic Discovery

2009

AAJ Annual Meeting

Electronic Discovery

Publications

2005

Trial (American Association for Justice) Deciphering the Adverse Event Reporting System

Languages

English

Spanish

Activity

Top Contributor

Keith earned significant contribution points in 2024.

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 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