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 1 - 5 of 7 reviews | 1 star

Posted by Luis | January 07, 2025 | Hired Attorney | Child Custody

Catastrophic mistake. I’d give 0 stars if it were an option.

Kurt and Mr. Woo both lacked empathy and understanding. I’ve paid $11k and in return they did… nothing really. Trial lasted 5 minutes! I file for joint physical and legal custody with child support being offset to determine the amount. Felt like it would be fair. Defendant does not provide a FDF. I ...kept asking Mr. Woo, attorney who works for Kurt, to push for her FDF. Before trial they asked both parties for updated FDF’s. Defendant had nothing to update to begin with and she does it AGAIN! She does not provide her FDF! What in the tarnation is going on?! I’m am paying my attorney’s so much and they can not get the other party to provide her FDF. Kurt or Mr. Woo never called to provide me with updates on my case. Only calls I received were from the assistants to collect $500 every month that was it. My son is 12 yrs old no issues in the past until recently when she finds out about her 4th and last settlement received January 2024 the other 3 she received it back in 2018. She then files for child support a way she can continue receiving income. This is because she no longer cares to work. She intentionally quits her job. Her claims were about receiving money and mine was about more time. Kurts action showed no interest. He allows the defendant be awarded primary custody when she never said I’m a bad dad and who does not care if I’m involved in our son life. I become the non-custodial parent who is now broke. I would not recommend this firm to any truly honest fathers out there. You will lose time with your child. Hiring Smith legal group not only was a mistake that I made it also made life difficult and complicated for me. When we have the Nevada state law leaning towards awarding both parents in shared joint custody of the child, no history of DV, I never seen a jail cell, no drugs involve and never neglected my boy. What did I do wrong that I Kurt could not help in being awarded joint custody?! I seriously don’t know what to say but I am disappointed, upset and feel cheated. $11k gone with negative results. During the process I was providing support but incorrectly. When I asked Mr.Wu if send her money through zelle was ok he said yes but to put child support but I decided to write her personal checks just trying to show I’m a responsible parent.I find out that it was incorrect I was misinformed.I had to go through the agency for payments. The Defendant who, taking the personal checks, had knowledge but decided to stay quiet because I now have to pay arrears paying her a second time. I have no choice but to pay. When I gained knowledge of child support i find out what I did, in the eyes of the law, is provided her with a “gift”. I did not think that my situation can get any more worse than with everything that has happened to me. IT DOES! I recently discover defendant received 4 different settlement 3 back in 2018 and the last one in 2024 and said nothing about! The settlements was from a negligence-auto case. She received in February 2018 she $40,398.50, March 2018 she received $42,096.59, May 2018 she received $12,337.92 and in January 2024 she received $76,944.30. After receiving the last settlement she intentionally quits her job! Her reason was that she was bullied. I had a feeling she wasn't being honest about it. I’m struggling and being pressured to pay support! I’m not avoiding payments just trying to finish with the arrears! Kurt and Woo has misrepresented me due to negligence and providing false or misleading information to the court that has me titled noncustodial parent. We would have known about her financial situation and seen evidence that she is currently sitting on lots of money if they did not fail to exercise the level of care that is expected of them and not lack in oversight or inadequate research. Life is more difficult for me and now broke. I have to watch the defendant get away with murder. How is this “what is best for my child” a good thing? I do not recommend Kurt to any honest parent.

Kurt Smith

Replied last January 07, 2025

Mr. Echeverria's comments are disappointing, but not altogether unexpected. Mr. Echeverria came to Smith Legal Group on a case involving Custody and Child Support. Mr. Echeverria's goal, in retrospect, was to get as much time with his Child as he could, but to pay no Child Support. While both goals are possible, nothing is guaranteed. Mr. Echeverria was accused by opposing counsel of having spent very little time with his Child over the years. When the case originally went to Court, based largely on the text messages of the Parties which showed that Mr. Echeverria was not present very often and that he was verbally abusive and dismissive to his ex, the Court started Mom with Primary Physical Custody. Even at that point, however, we were able to convince the Court to reduce Mr. Echeverria's Child Support to an amount much closer to that of a Joint Physical Custody award. Although we obtained a set schedule for Dad and the Child and got a reduction in his Child Support obligation, Mr. Echeverria fired my firm and began leaving bad reviews for me whereever he could think to do so. Several months later, however, Mr. Echeverria called my office and apologized for being as rude as he was. He then hired my office to represent him a second time at trial. When the date of trial came, we went to Court, but tried a last ditch effort at negotiating a resolution with opposing counsel. Ultimately, however, Mom was not willing to provide Mr. Echeverria with more time with the Child. She did, however, offer to significantly lower his Child Support obligation if Dad would allow her to maintain Primary Physical Custody. The negotiations lasted about an hour and a half, but ultimately, Mr. Echeverria was faced with two choices - take a lower Child Support amount and keep the time that he had with the child, or proceed with the trial and fight for Joint Physical Custody. However, I forewarned him that if we went to trial, the Court would likely raise his Child Support obligation - even if he won Joint Physical Custody. Ultimately, Mr. Echeverria had a choice - take a much lower Child Support obligation or fight for more time. Although Mr. Echeverria struggled with the decision, ultimately he decided that the lower Child Support obligation was more important to him than having additional time with his Child. Accordingly, we settled the case, went into Court, and placed a Stipulated Custody Order on the record that maintained Mom having Primary Physical Custody with a lowered Child Support obligation for Mr. Echeverria. The Judge accepted the terms and the case was closed. Unfortunately, IMMEDIATELY AFTER COURT Mr. Echeverria stormed out of the courtroom and stated that he was no longer happy with the terms that he had agreed to and that he wanted to fight for more time. Mr. Echeverria was informed that he had just resolved the case less than 60 seconds prior and that the Court would not reopen the case unless something major happened that required a change. That made Mr. Echeverria very angry and he began accusing my office of misrepresenting him. I wish Mr. Echeverria luck in his future endeavors. But it is Mr. Echeverria who decided what was more important to him - more time with the Child or a lower Child Support obligation. It is Mr. Echeverria who accepted the terms of the Settlement. He could have gone to trial. However, he was not willing to do so if it meant that his Child Support obligation might increase.

Posted by Don | January 29, 2021

Had a phone appointment for consultation. He never called never cancelled.

He must be a real important person, since there was no consideration given to my time. A phone consultation was setup via email for 5:00 pm. I cleared my schedule and waited for the call that never came. It is now 20 hours later and I have not received any explanation via email or phone. I will/wo...uld never work with anyone who shows such disrespect for other peoples time.

Kurt Smith

Replied last January 29, 2021

Hmmmm. I don't know who "Don," is, but it's 8:21 p.m. on a Friday evening and I am still sitting at my desk working for clients to get the best results for them that I can. I can say a few things, however, which are 1) we do not typically set up consultations via email - we do it personally over the phone; 2) I don't have anyone named "Don" on my appointment calendar throughout the past week, and 3) I haven't missed a consultation, either in person or over the telephone, in several years. That said, Don, if you are in need of legal assistance, I would be happy to help.

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 Liz | February 10, 2020 | Hired Attorney | Family

Disappointed

We hired Kurt after talking with many attorneys by phone consultation. He seemed knowledgable and able to take on the case. Over the last month, the phone calls are being ignored and there was no thought for any agreements for certain time frames. For someone who does family law daily, the basi...cs that we are dealing with should be common knowledge and able to be negotiated. But many of the basics like holidays with children were never discussed or agreed upon. This should have not been my job to make these arrangements, this should have been done through our attorney that we are paying for.

Kurt Smith

Replied last February 10, 2020

"Liz" is not a client. She is the mother of a client. Liz's complaint, however, is not accurate. In her daughter's case, her daughter settled her case, and agreed to two Visitation Plans - a pre-move plan valid for 3 months, and a post-move plan valid (ostensibly) until the child turns 18. Liz is upset that the pre-move plan her daughter agreed to while in Nevada did not include ADDITIONAL TIME for Visitation over the Christmas Holiday. AFTER the plan was entered as an Order of the Court, Liz, not her daughter the actual client, began contacting our office to request ADDITIONAL TIME over the Christmas Holiday. Liz then got very angry that we could not get the opposing party to agree to ADDITIONAL TIME. While I certainly understand Liz's concern, all clients need to be aware that once a deal is agreed upon and finalized with the Court, it is often very difficult to undo the deal that was made. For the record, Liz's daughter DID have time with the Child over the Christmas holiday. However, she did not have 1) as much time as she wanted, and 2) as much time as he was going to have under part 2 of the Agreement. Moreover, Liz's questions were answered in a timely manner - she just didn't get the answer that she wanted. That notwithstanding, it was a pleasure working with Liz and her daughter and we would happy to work with her daughter again in the future should the need arise. Liz was correct about two things, however. We do give great legal consultations and we are VERY knowledgeable.

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