Kurt A. Smith

PRO

Kurt A. Smith

4.4
Rating: 7.2

Licensed for 18 years

Family Lawyer at Henderson, NV
Practice Areas: Family, Adoption, Marriage & Prenuptials ... +3 more

1701 N. Green Valley Parkway, Suite 8E, Henderson, NV

Virtual Consultation Available

About Kurt

Biography

Smith Legal Group provides expert-level services for all family law cases. Help is one call away!

We handle all family law cases including Divorce, Child Custody, Annulment, Guardianship, and more!

Practice Areas

6

Practice Areas

Adoption 25%

25%
Family 25%

25%
Marriage and Prenuptials 20%

20%
Alimony 10%

10%
Child Abuse 10%

10%
Uncontested Divorce 10%

10%

Fees and Rates

Cost

Hourly Rates

$ 300-450 per hour


Payment Methods

  • Cash
  • Check
  • Credit Card

Awards

Client's Choice
Client's Choice
2017 2016 2015
...
+ 1

Licenses

Licensed in Nevada for 18 years

State: Nevada

Acquired: 2007

Active

Lawyer disciplined by state licensing authority in 2018

Location

Smith Legal Group

1701 N. Green Valley Parkway, Suite 8E, Henderson, NV, 89074

thelegalsmith.com

Kurt A. Smith's Reviews

Avvo Review Score

4.4 /5.0

46 Client Reviews

Showing 11 - 13 of 13 reviews | Communication Style

Posted by Melody Villegas | August 22, 2014 | Family

A LAWYER WITH A BIG HEART!!!!

I referred Kurt to a friend of mine that he and his office represented very well. But my review is mainly to tell you I was in Shock and Aww when one day I had to go to Family court and didn't have a lawyer and Kurt saw me sitting there and asked what I was doing and when I explained the story he rep...resented me for free. I couldn't believe it. Never in my life have I ever seen a lawyer do what he did. I can't thank him enough for taking his busy time to help me. Something I will never forget. I want to thank you and let society know - He's a family man himself and has a heart. So when your looking for a great family lawyer I would highly recommend Kurt and his firm. They have great communication skills and stay on top of your case.

Posted by anonymous | August 18, 2020 | Hired Attorney | Child Custody

Incredibly Unprofessional and Creeper

Even though he was rude and yawned continuously throughout my consultation, I hired him because his retainer fee was lower than most other lawyers and the other ones were unavailable that week at a family law convention.....And I ended up getting burned badly. He didn't show up to a TPO hearing as p...romised on time and missed the entire thing. Then while discussing details to a custody agreement document, he gripped my shoulder with his hand and rested it there for an uncomfortably long time....and not only did it once but TWICE. Then after I submitted the signed documents to the judge, I called to ask about further details. I was lucky I did because he then suddenly remembered he needed to respond to my counter parts custody filing. So on the last possible day to file it, he asked me to meet him at the court house to sign the paperwork and was late to his following engagement so he went straight to that hearing and made me wait in the parking lot for an hour with my two toddlers. THEN he tried to charge me $2500 for a no show, one filing and his paralegal drawing up those three documents. In addition to THAT his accountant kept leaving off a two hundred dollar payment I made in conjunction with other transactions that were made for his retainer fee, so it took MONTHS to finally resolve the issue. Even though at the end of it all, his accountant STILL never looked fully into it. I had to get my bank statement prepared to send them and when they finally allowed me to pay my account out....his rep mentioned doing it as a favor and avoiding filing a motion for something against me..... It was unbelievable.

Kurt Smith

Replied last August 18, 2020

Valerie is just coming off of a billing dispute with the company. Accordingly, there are just a couple of details Valerie left out of her review. Valerie retained services at Smith Legal Group on March 10, 2020, to assist her with her CUSTODY case. She informed me that she had a TPO Dissolution Hearing the next day, but that she wanted to try to settle the matter with her ex without protracted litigation. Valerie asked me to meet her at the Courthouse, but not to announce that I was her attorney unless she felt like it was needed. I informed Valerie that we had several other Hearings that day, but that we would try to make it for her Hearing AS A COURTESY, as we were only retained to represent her in her CUSTODY case. As it turned out, I was able to get to Valerie's Hearing just as it was ending and Valerie informed me that everything went fine and that she didn't need me at the Hearing. We then worked with Valerie behind the scenes to come up with a Settlement Agreement that met ALL of her needs, without letting her ex know that she was working with an attorney, and avoiding protracted litigation. As stated, Valerie retained our services on March 10, 2020. VALERIE'S CASE WAS COMPLETELY SETTLED BY MARCH 19, 2020. Now here is the rest of the story. Although Valerie retained our services on March 10, 2020, She was not able to come up with a full retainer - in fact it was not even close. That notwithstanding, we continued assisting Valerie fulfilling our end of the agreement, while turning a blind eye toward Valerie's seeming incessant excuses about why she couldn't pay her bill as agreed. After we finished her case, Valerie still hadn't even come up with the money for her initial retainer. We eventually recently settled the Bill with Valerie for pennies on the dollar. However, as evidenced by her review, Valerie holds a grudge for even having to pay a partial payment for stellar legal work at a very reasonable rate. Lots of people come to my office looking for assistance on a budget. My heart goes out to all of them. But it is clients like Valerie, who take advantage of the willingness to help, that ruins things for the others that come in after. Because of clients like Valerie, who ask for favors up front, take advantage of the services offered and the favors done, and then lash out on line later under the "anonymous" moniker, Attorneys, and other professionals, grow very leery of offering kindness - it becomes not worth it when the kindness turns out to not be appreciated. That said, despite Valerie's shenanigans, I still hold out hope that karma remains kind to those who help others. ***NOTE: What is true from Valerie's review is that there are times when I yawn during consultations. I routinely work until 2 or 3 in the morning and have to be ready for 9 am Hearings or all day Trials the next day. It doesn't mean I'm not interested. It means that I really didn't get enough sleep that week and my body is feeling it. Note, however, that even Valerie, who is overly concerned about her bill that was heavily reduced to an amount much less than she owed, did not complain about the result. She won her case on terms she was extremely happy with all in less than two weeks. You're welcome Valerie.

Posted by Holly | March 17, 2016 | Hired Attorney | Lawsuits & Disputes

KEEP LOOKING

Think TWICE & move on before retaining this attorney! Especially if you expect professionalism, communication & value for your money. My first clue should have been the poorly written demand letter. Little wonder it didn't have the desired effect. Neither did my call to his office asking ...further action be put on hold. Oddly, Mr Smith continued ordering work be typed up which conveniently used up my retainer. His office manager couldn't resolve my concerns so she set up a phone conference at 1 pm. By 7pm, he hadn't called nor could I get any help from his staff. Don't be taken in by his calm demeanor & confidence. After the initial consult you'll never talk to him again. Also kiss your retainer goodbye when you give it to him. He'll find some reason to use it up, believe me!!

Kurt Smith

Replied last March 17, 2016

Holly is a client that first came to my office on June 23, 2015. She was having issues visiting with her grandkids that she felt had to be resolved by mid-July 2015. After listening to her issues, we developed a plan that included initiating a Grandparent's Rights Visitation action, filing a Motion for said visitation, and attempting to expedite the hearing with the Court so that her deadline could be met. I explained that it was imperative that we act immediately, as a failure to do so would result in the Court not having time to hear her case before her deadline. Holly fails to mention that despite her urgent need for legal services, she could only come up with a highly reduced retainer fee. Notwithstanding her need for expedited legal services and inability to come up with a full retainer, I agreed to take Holly's case. Holly hired my office on June 25, 2015, at which time I immediately assigned my staff to begin working on her case. On July 2, 2016, Holly changed the plan. Rather than immediately submitting the legal paperwork that we had drafted, Holly decided she would rather first send a Demand Letter to the opposing party. She then demanded to review the letter prior to its submittal. It was explained to Holly that 1) in this circumstance, a Demand Letter was unlikely to be effective and 2) changing the strategy mid-stream like this was likely going to make meeting her stated deadline impossible. Holly indicated that she understood and the new strategy was implemented. The Demand Letter was drafted and submitted to Holly, who sent it back with requested changes due to her fear that the tone of the demand letter was overly harsh and she didn't want to hurt the opposing party's feelings. The revisions Holly requested were made and the letter was submitted. Not surprisingly, Holly's Demand Letter was ineffective and Holly's deadline was missed. In fact, Holly's deadline came and went and Holly never gave the office the permission to file her legal papers. My office kept in touch with Holly over the next few months. Holly was having many of the same ups and downs with the opposing party that she was having prior to coming into my office. However, she could never quite bring herself to file the papers that we had drafted for her. On September 5, 2015, I emailed Holly informing her that we had not heard from her in a while and asking her what she wanted to do with her case. On September 7, 2015, Holly emailed me back asking us to hold off, as she was having second thoughts, but thanking us for the great work that we had done so far. On November 13, 2015, Holly contacted my office, informed us that she no longer wanted to proceed with her case, and asking for a refund of her retainer fee. My office manager informed Holly that she was entitled to a refund of all unused retainer fees, which at that point was $269.51. Holly became irate. She felt that even though she had hired my office to do legal work back in June and that my office, pursuant to her request, had drafted the legal documents requested, because she hadn't used the documents, she shouldn't have to pay for them. Holly claimed to have asked me to hold off on all work during one of our conversations about her case in August 2015 (so much for not being able to get a hold of me). Holly was reminded that she had hired our office in June 2015 and that we had begun our work immediately. Accordingly, even if Holly had requested us to stop work in August, she would have had to pay for the time spent drafting the legal documents for her in the June/July timeframe. To date, we have sent Holly a retainer refund check approximately three times. Holly keeps sending it back demanding a full refund. I appreciate Holly's compliment regarding my calm demeanor and confidence. We do excellent work, but we do need to be paid for the work that we do. We generally do not offer refunds for work that has already been completed.

See All Client Reviews

Kurt A. Smith's Lawyer Endorsements

Endorse Kurt
Carol M Barnes headshot
Carol Barnes

Family lawyer | Jun 21

Relationship: Opposing Counsel on matter

"I endorse this lawyer. Kurt is a knowledgeable and compassionate attorney who zealously advocates for his client. As opposing counsel, Kurt always promptly responded to my calls and worked toward resolution."

Mark V. Clay headshot
Mark Clay

Family lawyer | Aug 23

Relationship: Fellow lawyer in community

"I highly endorse Mr. Smith. Truly exceptional and caring attorney who produces great results in representing clients! I want all people with legal problems to contact him first."

John Fisher headshot
John Fisher

Family lawyer | Jul 04

Relationship: Fellow lawyer in community

"I endorse this lawyer. Intelligent and compassionate with superior communication skills."

Jonathan Pierre Lacour headshot
Jonathan Lacour

Family lawyer | Apr 27

Relationship: Fellow lawyer in community

"I endorse this lawyer. Quality representation and exceptional attentiveness to clients."

Brandon K. Leavitt headshot
Brandon Leavitt

Family lawyer | Mar 17

Relationship: Opposing Counsel on matter

"Mr. Smith is a highly skilled and competent attorney. He is courteous and professional and does an excellent job zealously representing his clients. He his a credit to our profession and I am pleased to call him my friend and colleague."

Jill L Rogers headshot
Jill Rogers

Unknown lawyer | Jan 15

Relationship: Other

"I endorse this lawyer."

Judd S Nemiro headshot
Judd Nemiro

Unknown lawyer | Jan 12

Relationship: Other

"Great representation. I endorse this lawyer."

Christian K. Lassen II headshot
Christian Lassen

Unknown lawyer | Dec 21

Relationship: Fellow lawyer in community

"Top-notch attorney. Highly respected in the legal community."

View All Endorsements
Carol M Barnes headshot
Carol Barnes

Family lawyer

Jonathan Pierre Lacour headshot
Jonathan Lacour

Unknown lawyer

Brandon K. Leavitt headshot
Brandon Leavitt

Child custody lawyer

Eric P. Roy headshot
Eric Roy

Child custody lawyer

Gary M. Zernich headshot
Gary Zernich

Family lawyer

Jill L Rogers headshot
Jill Rogers

Child custody lawyer

Christian K. Lassen II headshot
Christian Lassen

Unknown lawyer

Judd S Nemiro headshot
Judd Nemiro

Family lawyer

Experience

Rating:  7.2 (Very Good)

Professional misconduct

This lawyer was disciplined by a state licensing authority in 2018.

Public Reprimand issued in NV, 2018

updated on 12/07/2018

Public reprimand means an attorney did something wrong but may still practice law. The State gives the lawyer a public reprimand in hopes that he or she will not repeat the behavior. Details of the infraction are made part of the public record.

Honors

2014

Client Choice Award, AVVO

Work Experience

2011 - Present

Attorney/Owner, Smith Legal Group

2009 - 2011

Attorney/Partner, Smith & Kim Attorneys at Law

2006 - 2009

Associate, Ballard Spahr Andrews & Ingersoll

Associations

2007 - Present

Nevada State Bar

attorney member

Education

2007

William S. Boyd School of Law

JD - Juris Doctor

1999

University of Nevada

BS - Bachelor of Science

Speaking Engagements

2007

Family Law Education Course

Family Law

Languages

English

French

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 2018
    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