Harold Palmer Smith III

Harold Palmer Smith III

also known as Peter Smith

4.0
Rating: 7.5

Licensed for 39 years

Mediation Lawyer at Oakland, CA
Practice Areas: Mediation, Litigation, Real Estate

The Latham Square Building, 1611 Telegraph Ave, Suite 210, Oakland, CA

About Harold

Biography

Practice Areas

3

Practice Areas

Mediation 60%

37 years | 250 cases

60%
Litigation 20%

37 years | 1,200 cases

20%
Real Estate 20%

37 years | 500 cases

20%

Fees and Rates

Cost

Hourly Rates

$ 375-495 per hour


Payment Methods

  • Check

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 39 years

State: California

Acquired: 1986

Active

No misconduct found

Location

Smith LLP

The Latham Square Building, 1611 Telegraph Ave, Suite 210, Oakland, CA, 94612

Ad

Transform legal challenges into solutions.

Connect now to review your situation.

The Avvo Rating explained

display-bg

The Avvo Rating explained

Harold Palmer Smith III's Reviews

Avvo Review Score

4.0 /5.0

4 Client Reviews

5 star (3)
4 star (0)
3 star (0)
2 star (0)
1 star (1)

Posted by anonymous | October 11, 2013

Competent, Reliable, Trustworthy with good judgment and legal skills

Peter Smith and his firm, Dhillon Smith, are corporate counsel for the company I serve as CEO.Peter represented the company in numerous actions, including our counter-suits, involving a former employee. The nature of the actions involved fraud, concealment and failure to disclose material facts to pr...ospective investors, breach of fiduciary duties, self-dealing, etc. The former employee's attorney took on his case on contingency fees, and attempted to shakedown and bully the company and its executives at depositions and in court. Peter's handling of the actions could not have been more effective and successful. He was calm, competent, low-key and very effective where it matters. While the other attorney was into theatrics and intimidation/bullying. Peter's style was focused, nuanced, and demonstrative of sound legal judgment and high quality professionalism. Peter created a simple, effective legal framework for the company to present his case for the company, presented it to the judge in a trial lasting several days. The result speaks for itself: the judge overwhelmingly ruled in favor of Peter and the company. To make it more satisfying, the judge on separate occasions admonished the other attorney for conduct. In contrast, the judge was very satisfied with Peters conduct and professionalism. At all times in this multi-year, multi-action process Peter kept the Board and CEO fully informed of what he is doing. He discussed his legal strategy, asked for feedback, incorporated those elements that we offered he found of value, explained why some of my other points didn’t matter, etc. In other words, his working style enabled the company and its executives to feel part of a team in working with the outside counsel in a very important matter. Peter, considering the company's interests, had also filed court papers to insure the other party would be held liable for the attorney's fees in the frivolous actions they imposed on the company. The company is waiting for the judge to complete their ruling and expects to recover its costs (plus damages). I've worked with some of the best attorneys in corporate law/litigation in the bay area. I'd rate Peter Smith and Harmeet Dhillon among the top. Their firm is small, the service is personalized, your case would be handled by the name partners, their cost structure is far lower than a big law firm so you get excellent value for your money. If you are a CEO/head of a small or medium business I'd suggest you consider Peter Smith as corporate counsel. If you are an executive or founder of a company and need a sound, competent, low-key attorney to protect your interests, I'd suggest you consider Peter Smith. Lastly, if you are faced with someone attempting to intimidate/bully you with legal threats you'd do well to consider Peter Smith to represent you.

Posted by Shri | September 24, 2013

Great Attorney & His Excellent Firm

Peter (as he prefers to be called) is a great trail attorney. He is a partner of his small but extremely effective firm Dhillon and Smith LLP. He along with his partner Harmeet Dhillon have, I think, put together a great team to help people like me to navigate complicated legal trials and processes ... emerging from some knotty business partnership disputes. Peter has a great temperament to deal with the highs and lows of the emotions that I went through with my business issues and calmly helped me to make decisions by explaining the legal and trail nuances leading to successful solutions each step of the way. In conversations with Peter I felt the dept of his experience and that was very reassuring to me. I am not an attorney or an expert in the Law by far and this is just from my experience as a layman client. His firm, Dhillon & Smith LLP, have rates that are slightly on the higher side but they are very efficient with their hours. They are client friendly and work through any issues that may come up. Thanks Peter and Harmeet ... and team. I highly recommend them.

Posted by Bob | September 18, 2013

ok in select areas, below average to risky in other areas

We hired Harold Smith to represent the company as general counsel. As founder, CEO,and largest shareholder I had a ring-side seat in observing Harold's performance as counsel for about four-five years. Harold is expensive and ok value in select areas: real estate transactions and contracts and liti...gation, dealing with the city and state departments involving commercial and residential real estate. He was not as effective in other areas, specifically litigation involving business or commercial entities, employee-employer risk management, negotiating and settling with attorneys representing irate customers or business partners or employees, smoothing through upset shareholders, etc. Harold's inexperience, and his refusal to acknowledge it, complicated matters very much and proved in time to be expensive for my company. The company concluded we needed someone that was more experienced in those areas Harold was not strong, we needed less of real-estate focused legal help where he is ok. So we switched to another firm. Harold's handling of our decision to switch legal representation made things very difficult and he could have been more professional.

Harold Smith

Replied last September 30, 2013

This comment is by Harold P. (Peter) Smith. The above review appears to be fictitious. I did not have a client more than three years ago that matches the set of facts that reviewer attribute to me.

Posted by anonymous | March 11, 2010

Client

Mr. Smith has represented my office for over 20 years. We would not consider using another lawyer. The results have always been in our favor. Mr. Smith's responses to our emails and telephone calls have been constantly quick, his billings are fair and reasonable, and his observations of a given ...situation are always on the mark. We have the greatest confidence in Mr. Smith's professional demeanor as well his consistent ability to negotiate difficult situations. Mr. Smith is passionate about his work and beyond reproach.

See All Client Reviews

Harold Palmer Smith III's Lawyer Endorsements

Endorse Harold
Kevin John Holl headshot
Kevin Holl

Litigation lawyer | Mar 22

Relationship: Worked together on matter

"I worked as co-counsel with Peter through a six-week trial to successfully defend a nationally prominent real estate brokerage firm, a development group and individual brokers for alleged intentional fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and violations of BPC § 17200. Peter was always thoroughly prepared and did a phenomenal job advocating on behalf of his clients. He was aggressive but fair during trial. His briefs were extremely well researched and written and he was concise and persuasive in his witness examinations. I recommend him without qualification."

View All Endorsements
Patricia McCoy Smith headshot
Patricia Smith

Real estate lawyer

Experience

Rating:  7.5 (Very Good)

Honors

1991

Distinguished Alumnus of the Year, Head-Royce School

Work Experience

2006 - Present

Partner, Dhillon & Smith

2002 - 2006

Partner, Law Offices of Harold P. Smith

1997 - 2002

Partner, Law Offices of Stein, Smith, Rudser & Cohen, LLP

1992 - 1997

Partner, Law Offices of Stein & Smith

1989 - 1992

Senior Associate, Law Offices of Birka-White & Stein

1989 - 1989

Counsel, California State Legislature, Joint Legislative Audit Committee

1986 - 1989

Deputy District Attorney, Alameda County District Attorney

Associations

2011 - Present

Claremont Country Club

Board of Directors

2004 - 2013

Head-Royce Board of Trustees

Board Member

1997 - 1998

Estuary Plan Advisory Committee

Member

1993 - 1998

General Plan Congress, City of Oakland

Chair

1992 - 2000

Oakland Commerce Corporation

Board of Directors

1992 - 2000

Coliseum Redevelopment Advisory Committee

1992 - 1993

Metropolitan Task Force on Downtown Redevelopment

1991 - 1996

Planning Comission

Commissioner

1991 - 1992

Task Force on Community Restoration & Emergency Preparedness, Planning & Zoning Committee

Chair

Sample of Legal Cases

Austrian v. Ramachandran

Defense verdict

Republican Party of Los Angeles County, et al. v. Barnett, et al.

Judge granted motion to strike and dismissed case

Elhilu v. Tustin

Settlement

Glicksberg v. Marcus & Millichap

Settlement

Prentiss Properties

Office building constructed.

Fentons

Business successfully reopened.

Skyline v. Mehta

Settlement

MDS Company v. Advanced Vacuum Tech.

Settlement after opening statement.

Prentiss Properties

Developments granted.

California College of the Arts

Dormitory constructed.

Head Over Heels Gymnastics

Rent set for client on favorable terms.

SNK Development

Apartment buildings constructed.

Montgomery v. Wright Architects

Full recovery of costs and attorneys fees.

Ebook

Corporate reorganization

California Waste Solutions

Employee purchase of business

Defective Pipe Litigation

Settlements

See More Legal Cases

Education

1986

U of San Francisco SOL

Law

1982

Harvard University

BA - Bachelor of Arts

Speaking Engagements

1998

Rail~Volution '98

"Balancing Regulations and Incentives: 'Transit Friendly Development'"

1998

League of California Cities 1998 Economic Development Conference

"Working with Business Groups, Chambers and CBOs to Achieve Economic Development"

Publications

1999

Oakland Business Review "An Attorney Looks at Downtown Development"

1994

Focus on Business, Oakland Chamber of Commerce "The Downtown Revitalization Plan"

1992

Oakland Tribune "Oakland Should Consider Mixed-Use Projects Downtown"

1992

Alameda County Apartment Owners News Magazine "Are You Covered for Your Contractor's Mistakes?"

Languages

English

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