No Photo

Sarah Kern

Licensed for 24 years

Lawyer at Tarzana, CA

18757 Burbank Blvd Ste 201, Tarzana, CA

Claim Profile

Is this your profile? Claiming it is free and only takes 2 minutes.

About Sarah

Practice Areas

This attorney has not specified their practice areas.

Fees and Rates

We have not found any cost information for this lawyer


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 California for 24 years

State: California

Acquired: 2001

Active

No misconduct found

Location

Goldfarb & Luu

18757 Burbank Blvd Ste 201, Tarzana, CA, 91356-6338

Ad

Transform legal challenges into solutions.

Connect now to review your situation.

The Avvo Rating explained

display-bg

The Avvo Rating explained

Sarah Kern's Reviews

Avvo Review Score

1.0 /5.0

1 Client Review

Filter Avvo Reviews (1) Refine reviews to match your needs. Use the filters to quickly surface reviews that align with your case or priorities.
Star rating
5 stars 0
4 stars 0
3 stars 0
2 stars 0
1 star 1
Practice Areas

Showing 1 - 1 of 1 review | Probate

Posted by Lori | June 25, 2025 | Hired Attorney | Probate

Legal documents & court representation review

Please read this review in its entirety if you are considering this firm to handle any estate planning documents or advocate for you in court. I consider this review to serve as public service announcement because I was introduced to this firm through a seminar with a nationally recognized public s...ervice, non-profit organization. Sarah was introduced to my mother through her employment or consultation services with the firm Goldfarb/ Luu in Tarzana. She handled a probate court matter for my mother. Legal Documents: Legal agreement constructed by Sarah, contained instructions, I am assuming, from a publisher, and it was sent to us. It read: “[It may be desirable to be more detailed in identifying the arbitration mechanism, or it may be preferable to preserve the option of jury or court trial for the client.]” My mother is the client. She was paying for legal expertise and you are sending me attorney instructions on how to complete the agreement. And, it was sent without a strategy meeting to discuss the pros and cons of using it. We mentioned it as an option in passing to explore after the court outcome. Court Representation: The court filings were redundant. Judge called that out in the hearing. On more than one occasion they were rushed. For example, Sarah would call around 1pm to notify me of an email for my mother to sign with the expectation to send it back within a few hours. I served as tech-support for my 82-year old mother at her request. Lastly, Sarah mentioned our judge was new to probate and unpredictable. Well, I looked her up. She went to Harvard Law, practiced in the area for 7+ years, Duke Undergrad, been on the bench for 7 years, served as expert witness, and was accepted into ACTEC. Please google ACTEC. Distinguished organization for top practicing attorneys, with skill, writings, teachings, with aim to improve and reform probate tax trust laws procedures etc. Does any of that read “new” to you? In my opinion, Sarah told us that to lower our expectations and deflect from the fact that our case did not meet the burden for probate. How do I know this? The judge told us in the hearing. Timing of Notices: Hearing Notices to our “enemy” were sent out 6 months prior to the hearing when 30 days is required. The opposing party did not attend the hearing or hire an attorney to notify them. In my opinion, this gave them advance time to prepare a fight. My mother is very disappointed and asked me to file the necessary complaints and reviews to warn other people.

See All Client Reviews

Sarah Kern's Lawyer Endorsements

Endorse Sarah

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

Education

N/A

Lewis & Clark Law School

N/A

University of Southern California Law School

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