Scott Crispin Greco Blankenship

PRO

Scott Crispin Greco Blankenship

also known as Scott C. G. Blankenship, Scott Blankenship

4.5
Rating: 10.0

Licensed for 33 years

Discrimination Lawyer at Seattle, WA
Practice Areas: Discrimination, Employment & Labor, Personal Injury ... +2 more

1000 2nd Ave, Suite 3250, Seattle, WA

Virtual Consultation Available

About Scott

Biography

Undaunted Commitment to Justice: Experienced Trial Lawyers with Proven Results. Call Us Today

Practice Areas

5

Practice Areas

Discrimination 50%

50%
Employment and Labor 20%

20%
Personal Injury 20%

20%
Class Action 5%

5%
Medical Malpractice 5%

5%

Fees and Rates

We have not found any cost information for this lawyer

Awards

Client's Choice
Client's Choice
2023
Gold Client Champion
AV Preeminent Peer Review Rating

Licenses

Licensed in Alaska for 17 years

State: Alaska

Acquired: 2008

Active

No misconduct found

Licensed in Oregon for 20 years

State: Oregon

Acquired: 2006

Active

No misconduct found

Licensed in Washington for 33 years

State: Washington

Acquired: 1992

Active

No misconduct found

Location

The Blankenship Law Firm, PLLC

1000 2nd Ave, Suite 3250, Seattle, WA, 98104

blankenshiplawfirm.com/

Online Presence

Other places you can find Scott online.

Scott Crispin Greco Blankenship's Reviews

Avvo Review Score

4.5 /5.0

43 Client Reviews

Showing 1 - 2 of 2 reviews | Ethics & Professional Responsibility

Posted by anonymous | October 21, 2019 | Ethics & Professional Responsibility

Does not listen

After contacting, sending several emails with great detail, and even going over the case on the phone, it was clear that they were not listening. I was contacted by an intern (or similar employee) who was eating and only half listening during the phone call and clearly talking to someone else while o...n the phone with me. Repeating myself and going over the same info many times, which I definitely understand, but they kept asking me to repeat basic info like the company’s name etc.. When I asked why they were getting caught on an area of my case that was not related to the problem, they could not give me an answer. It felt like they were fishing for information while I was not protected under attorney client privilege which is something I’ll need to take another look into now.

Posted by anonymous | July 07, 2016 | Ethics & Professional Responsibility

Blankenship Fee Agreement operates to the lawyers advantage and clients Disadvantage

Read this before signing a fee agreement with the Blankenship law firm. I am not the first fee dispute, records show that in 2014 Judge Richard Jones decreased Mr. Blankenship's fee petition by 1 million dollars. (The case, Conti v. Corporate Services Group, Inc. 30 F. Supp3d 1051 W.D. Wa. 2014) If... you sign the Blankenship fee agreement you will allow him to take most or all of your settlement. Your pain and suffering and job loss will be drawn out for years. My case was never filed for an entire year and I was never told this. Yet, many time keepers worked on the case around the clock, as many as 6-8 time keepers on the case, I had a full office on this case but nothing was filed. In three years as a client, I NEVER ONCE received a real itemized bill showing what the attorneys were actually billing. I had no clue I would be paying $500/hour for Mr. Blankenship to eat lunch and for all of their lunches, dinners and uber as a client. Who knew that bills could be padded with no documentation that matched up. Once a settlement was decided, amazingly the bills for Mr. Blankenship closely matched the amount. Although, I as a client informed him I was not happy with that, I was pressured and told that Mr. Blankenship would drop me as a client and sue me if I refused to sign. Mr. Blankenship then told my husband that we were greedy if we did not allow Mr. Blankenship to take 84% of the settlement and the only way he would negotiate his billing records would be for us to sign the agreement. Deadlines and pressure after 3 years when he could not even file the case in a year. Consumers are the best judges! If you sign up to give Mr. Blankenship well over 84% of your settlement and Mr. Blankenship and a judge may think that this is fair YOU are the consumer to judge fairness. We are a free country to decide so other consumers may not want to make this mistake of signing up with the Blankenship firm. Mr. Blankenship will not negotiate or try to make you happy as a client, he will threaten you with legal action to remove your reviews so that no one knows what the Blankenship fee agreement really is about, but I want the public to know. I only wish I saw this information long ago to make a better decision for me and my family. Mr. Blankenship will also post confidential cases to reviews that are sealed, not keeping to professionalism or confidentiality as an attorney to the case and client.

Scott Blankenship

Replied last July 07, 2016

While we respect and appreciate candid feedback and always seek to learn from it, this client actually brought these accusations to court in the first-ever fee dispute I have had in over 24 years in practice. The U.S. District Court ruled in addressing this dispute that I, Scott Blankenship, “achieved an excellent result for [this client] despite the difficulties that this case presented.” In fact, this former client received the upper end of what she authorized for her settlement after fees and costs were deducted from her recovery. Regarding accusations that I acted in any way that was improper or unfair to this client, the U.S. District Court ruled, “nothing of the sort occurred here.” Regarding any claim that I did not diligently prosecute her case, the federal judge recognized, there “is no evidence in support of this accusation.” As to the reference to the Conti case, it is not a client fee dispute relating to a reduction of fees, and the federal judge added “[this former client] fails to establish any relevant similarities.” In that case, I convinced 12 jurors to find for the plaintiff, Mr. Conti in a hotly disputed race discrimination case. In short, the federal judge reviewed all of the evidence and ruled her accusations were “uniformly extreme and patently unfounded, which reflects poorly on the accusers—attorneys who, quite frankly should know better.” The same is true regarding this review it is both extreme and patently unfounded. We continue to have empathy for this former client and her many struggles. We will continue to get excellent results for our clients and regret that we must respond to this review. The Order Granting Motion to Enforce the Fee Agreement was signed by Judge Coughenour on March 31, 2016 in case number C13-0860 and is filed with the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

See All Client Reviews

Scott Crispin Greco Blankenship's Lawyer Endorsements

Endorse Scott
Michael S. Waddington headshot
Michael Waddington

Personal injury lawyer | May 26

Relationship: Fellow lawyer in community

"I endorse Scott. He is a highly skilled attorney that is well respected in the legal community."

Stephen A. Teller headshot
Stephen Teller

Wrongful termination lawyer | Nov 17

Relationship: Worked together on matter

"I have worked with Scott drafting legislation to improve workers' rights in Washington. He is clear, articulate, and organized. He is also easy to get along with when he's on your team, but I hear he's tough on the other side!"

Peter Malden Brown headshot
Peter Brown

Civil rights lawyer | Jun 07

Relationship: Worked together on matter

"I had the pleasure to work with Scott as co-counsel in the race discrimination trial of Zhang v. American Gem Seafoods. The jury returned a verdict of $3,100,000.00, which is one of the highest awards ever returned for this type of case. Scott fought for this client serving as appellate and lead counsel all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. He ultimately obtained a final recovery of close to $4,000,000.00. This exceptional outcome is a testament to Scott’s high standards of trial preparation, tenaciousness in court, and skill as an appellate lawyer. I have no hesitation in recommending Scott to any potential client. Peter M. Brown, Dawson-Brown ps"

Steven Michael Dickinson headshot
Steven Dickinson

Discrimination lawyer | Jun 06

Relationship: Fellow lawyer in community

"When our clients need an employment discrimination attorney, we refer them over to Scott. Need I say more?"

Mary Ruth Mann headshot
Mary Mann

Litigation lawyer | Jun 05

Relationship: Worked together on matter

"I endorse this lawyer's work. Scott Blankenship is a talented lawyer I have seen in many legal settings, and have observed and worked with in trial. He is excellent. "

View All Endorsements
Stephen A. Teller headshot
Stephen Teller

Employment and labor lawyer

Charles P. Moure headshot
Charles Moure

Business lawyer

Peter Malden Brown headshot
Peter Brown

Lawsuits and disputes lawyer

Mary Ruth Mann headshot
Mary Mann

Employment and labor lawyer

Experience

Rating:  10.0 (Superb)

Honors

2025

Super Lawyer, SuperLawyers

2024

Best in the NW, The Seattle Times

2024

Top 100 Trial Lawyers, National Trial Lawyers

2024

Best Lawyer, Best Lawyers in America

2024

Super Lawyer, SuperLawyers

2023

Top 100 Trial Lawyers, National Trial Lawyers

2023

Best Lawyer, Best Lawyers in America

2023

Super Lawyer, SuperLawyers

2022

Top 100 Trial Lawyers, National Trial Lawyers

2022

Super Lawyer, Super Lawyers

2022

Best Lawyer, Best Lawyers in America

2021

Top 100 Trial Lawyers, National Trial Lawyers

2021

Super Lawyer, Super Lawyers

2021

Best Lawyer, Best Lawyers in America

2020

Super Lawyer, Super Lawyers

2020

Best Lawyer, Best Lawyers in America

2020

Top 100 Trial Lawyers, National Trial Lawyers

2019

Best Lawyer, Best Lawyers in America

2019

Super Lawyer, Super Lawyers

2019

Top 100 Trial Lawyers, National Trial Lawyers

2018

Super Lawyer, Super Lawyers

2018

Top 100 Trial Lawyers, National Trial Lawyers

2018

Best Lawyer, Best Lawyers in America

2017

Super Lawyer, Super Lawyers

2017

Best Lawyer, Best Lawyers in America

2017

Top 100 Trial Lawyers, National Trial Lawyers

2016

Best Lawyers, Best Lawyers in America

2016

Super Lawyer, Super Lawyers

2015

Best Lawyer, Best Lawyers in America

2015

Super Lawyer, Super Lawyers

2014

Super Lawyer, Super Lawyers

2014

2014 Top Lawyers, Seattle Metropolitan Magazine

2014

Top 100 Trial Lawyer, The National Trial Lawyers

2014

Best Lawyer, Best Lawyers in America

2013

2013 Top Lawyers, Seattle Metropolitan Magazine

2013

Best Lawyer, Best Lawyers in America

2013

Super Lawyer, Super Lawyers

2013

Top 100 Trial Lawyer, The National Trial Lawyers

2012

2012 Top Lawyers, Seattle Metropolitan Magazine

2012

Super Lawyer, Super Lawyers

2012

Top 100 Trial Lawyer, The National Trial Lawyers (Formerly ATLA)

2012

Best Lawyer, Best Lawyers in America

2011

Top 100 Trial Lawyers, American Trial Lawyers Association (ATLA)

2011

2011 Top Lawyers, Seattle Metropolitan Magazine

2011

Super Lawyer, Washington Law & Politics Magazine

2010

2010 Top Lawyers, Seattle Metropolitan Magazine

2010

Super Lawyer, Washington Law & Politics Magazine

2010

Top Attorneys In Employment And Labor, Super Lawyers Magazine, National Corporate Counsel Edition

2010

Top 100 Trial Lawyers (ATLA), American Trial Lawyers Association

2009

Featured Attorney in September 2009 Bar Bulletin, King County Bar Association

2009

Top Attorneys In Employment And Labor, Super Lawyers Magazine, National Corporate Counsel Edition

2009

Super Lawyer, Washington Law & Politics Magazine

2009

Top 100 Trial Lawyers, American Trial Lawyers Association (ATLA)

2008

Avvo Top Employment/Labor Lawyer, Washington CEO Magazine

2008

Super Lawyer, Washington Law & Politics Magazine

2008

Top 100 Trial Lawyers, American Trial Lawyers Association (ATLA)

2007

Top 100 Trial Lawyers, American Trial Lawyers Association (ATLA)

2007

Super Lawyer, Washington Law & Politics Magazine

2006

Super Lawyer, Washington Law & Politics Magazine

2005

Workplace Warrior: Top 5 Cases -- Employee Rights 1985-2005, National Employment Lawyer Associaton

2005

Super Lawyer, Washington Law & Politics Magazine

2004

Super Lawyer, Washington Law & Politics Magazine

2003

Super Lawyer, Washington Law & Politics Magazine

2002

Rising Star, Washington Law & Politics Magazine

2001

Rising Star, Washington Law & Politics Magazine

2000

Rising Star, Washington Law & Politics Magazine

N/A

AV® Preeminent™ 5.0 out of 5, Martindale-Hubbell

Work Experience

1994 - Present

Managing Shareholder, The Blankenship Law Firm, PLLC

1993 - 1994

Partner, Blankenship, Gillette, and Rogowski

1991 - 1993

Associate, Gaitan & Cusack

1988 - 1988

Clerk/Intern, U.S. Senate Judiciary Commitee

Associations

2002 - Present

Washington State Trial Lawyers Association

Eagle Member

2000 - Present

Washington Employment Lawyers Association

Attorney Member

King County Bar Association

Member

Washington State Bar Association

Member

American Bar Association

Member

National Employment Lawyers Association

Member

Washington Employment Lawyers Association

Member

Association of Trial Lawyers of America

Member

Alaska State Bar Association

Member

Sample of Legal Cases

Miranda v. Alaska Longline, LLC

$1.85 Million Settlement

Anel v. CHI

$2.5 Million Settlement

EEOC, Lam and Rios v. Fry's Electronics

$2.4 million including $100,000 in sanctions and 2.3 million dollars settlement after arbitraion

Li et. al. v. Washington State University et. al.

$650,000 Settlement with non-monetary relief, consent decree and posting

Lindell v. City of Mercer Island et. al.

$1,000,000 + $90,560 for Public Records Act Violation Under Washington Law

EEOC et .all v. Mason County Forest Products

$900,000

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) v. Lowe's HIW, Inc.

$1.72 Million Settlement with EEOC Consent Decree

Zhang v. American Gem Seafoods

$3,963,033

Sharma v. City of Vancouver, et al.

$1,650,000

See More Legal Cases

Education

1991

Tulane University Law School

JD - Juris Doctor

1987

University of California - Los Angeles

BA - Bachelor of Arts

Speaking Engagements

2013

WSAJ CLE Employment Deskbook

Remedies In Employment Cases

2010

Washington Employment Lawyers Association CLE

Lecturer: Avoiding Dismissal After Iqbal

2010

A Perspective From Counsel for the Employee

Ethical Considertions In Workplace Investigations

2007

National Employment Lawyers Association, Annual Convention

Lecturer: National Origin Discrimination

2003

Washington State Trial Lawyers Employment Law Seminar

Lecturer: Strategies for Prosecuting Disability Cases Under State and Federal Law

2002

Damages: Washington State Trial Lawyers Association, Eagle Only Seminar

Lecturer: Proving Punitive Damages

2001

Plaintiff's Employment Litigation For The New Millennium: Washington Employment Lawyers Association

Lecturer: Persuading a Jury to Award Substantial Damages

2000

Washington State Trial Lawyers Employment Law Seminar

Lecturer: Substance & Subtlety: New Law and Effective Tactics for Plaintiff's Employment Lawyers

Publications

2013

Washington State Trial Lawyers Association Employment Law Deskbook Remedies

2009

American Association for Justice (AAJ) Employment Rights Quarterly Ashcroft v. Iqbal's Limited Application to Employment Discrimination Cases

2009

Trial News, Washington State Association for Justice The Power of Punitive Damages in Employment Discrimination and Retaliation Cases

2009

Washington State Association for Justice (WSAJ) Employment Deskbook Remedies for Employment Discrimination

2007

National Employment Lawyers Association Section 1981: The Most Powerful Law for Prosecuting National Origin Discrimination

2005

Trial News, Washington State Trial Lawyers Class Actions: Justice in Action

2004

Trial News, Washington State Trial Lawyers Federal Jury Awards Punitive Damages in Racial Discrimination Suit

2004

Trial News, Washington State Trial Lawyers U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Review Race Discrimination Verdict Awarded to Chinese American

2003

Washington State Trial Lawyers Employment Law Seminar Strategies for Prosecuting Disability Cases Under State and Federal Law

2002

Trial News, Washington State Trial Lawyers Employee Stock Compensation is Wages: Attorney's Fees Available for Recovery Under Washington Wage Law

2002

CLE for Eagle Members of Washington State Trial Lawyers Damages in Employment Cases

1990

Tulane Environmental Law Journal Unveiled: Corporate Officer, Parent and Successor Liability Under CERCLA

Languages

Spanish

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