Martindale-Hubbell Highest Peer Review Rating

Mr. Armstrong's Rating-"AV" Rated, Highest Rating Available for Ethical Standards and Legal Ability

Martindale-Hubbell recognizes Allan Armstrong as an AV® rated attorney, the highest such rating available to any individual lawyer.

Law firms are given the rating of the highest rated individual attorney.

Rating Explained

Martindale-Hubbell states as follows:

The Martindale-Hubbell® PEER REVIEW RATINGS™ are an objective indicator of a lawyer's high ethical standards and professional ability, generated from evaluations of lawyers by other members of the bar and the judiciary in the United States and Canada. The first review to establish a lawyer's rating usually occurs three years after his/her first admission to the bar.

LexisNexis facilitates secure online Martindale-Hubbell® PEER REVIEW RATINGS™ surveys of lawyers across multiple jurisdictions and geographic locations, in similar areas of practice as the lawyer being rated. Reviewers are asked to assess their colleagues' general ethical standards and legal ability in a specific area of practice. The ratings appear in all formats of the Martindale-Hubbell® Law Directory, in the online listings on martindale.com, Lawyers.comSM, on the LexisNexis services, on LN mobile apps. Your Martindale-Hubbell® PEER REVIEW RATINGS™ can also be displayed on your LinkedIn® profile via the LinkedIn® Lawyers Ratings Application.

AV Preeminent (4.5-5.0)- AV Preeminent is a significant rating accomplishment - a testament to the fact that a lawyer's peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence.
BV Distinguished (3.0-4.4) - BV Distinguished is an excellent rating for a lawyer with some experience. A widely respected mark of achievement, it differentiates a lawyer from his or her competition.
Rated (1.0-2.9) - The Peer Review Rated designation demonstrates that the lawyer has met the very high criteria of General Ethical Standing.Type your paragraph here

AV, BV, or "Rated"The Ratings Explanation
Martindale-Hubbell® PEER REVIEW RATINGS™ reflect a combination of achieving a Very High General Ethical Standards rating and a Legal Ability numerical rating. A threshold number of responses is required to achieve a rating.
The General Ethical Standards rating denotes adherence to professional standards of conduct and ethics, reliability, diligence and other criteria relevant to the discharge of professional responsibilities. Those lawyers who meet the "Very High" criteria of General Ethical Standards can proceed to the next step in the ratings process - Legal Ability.
Legal Ability ratings are based on performance in five key areas, rated on a scale of 1 to 5 (with 1 being the lowest and 5 being the highest). These areas are:

Legal Knowledge - Lawyer's familiarity with the laws governing his/her specific area of practice(s)
Analytical Capabilities - Lawyer's creativity in analyzing legal issues and applying technical knowledge
Judgment - Lawyer's demonstration of the salient factors that drive the outcome of a given case or issue.
Communication Ability - Lawyer's capability to communicate persuasively and credibly
Legal Experience - Lawyer's degree of experience in his/her specific area of practice(s)The numeric ratings range may coincide with the appropriate Certification Mark:

.

Armstrong Law Center, LLC

Enter text

attorneys at law

(205) 201-1LAW

Type your paragraph here.

We'll help you find your Way

Welcome to the Armstrong Law Center, LLC

Representative cases include the following:

a.       Rogers v. Transamerica Lender Finance, et al, CV-1995-000736.00 - class certified and undersigned counsel approved by the Honorable Roy Moore as class counsel representing individual debtors pursuing FDCPA claims. The matter successfully resolved through mediation resulting in payments to class members, payment of their attorneys fees, and related benefits of several million dollars.

       b.       Thompson v. Check Guarantee Service, CV-1995-000736.00 - represented individual debtors pursuing FDCPA claims, and received a six figure judgment on behalf of the class in front of the Honorable Judge Arthur J. Hanes.

c.       Green Valley Chiropractic v. Barranco Enterprises, CV-2004-004766 - represented individuals in certified class, which ultimately settled in mediation, for violations TCPA.

      d.       Delta Capital Resources v. Goldberg & Associates, 2:08-CV-01701_WMA - represented defrauded investor wherein jury returned verdict in amount of $792,054.00 ($500,000.00 in punitive damages).

e.       Assisted in numerous complex and class action cases, including, In re: Managed Care Litigation MDL 01334 (S.D. Fla.) representing nearly 700,000 of the Nation’s physicians and several state medical associations. The case, which involved civil RICO claims, expanded to include over 60 healthcare companies, and eventually led to settlements with the physicians, with benefits to the class estimated to exceed $2 billion dollars.

f.        Counsel in one of the first cases to go to trial against a leading ephedra manufacturer, related to the dangers of ephedra-based herbal supplements. The jury returned a $4.1 million verdict tried before the Honorable William A. Acker in Birmingham, Alabama. Although later reversed on appeal, the case led to the establishment of an ephedra MDL, and the global settlement by several manufacturers of ephedra-related injury claims.

g.       Miller v. Neurorecovery, Inc., CV-06-CV-0206-KOB - defense of this shareholder's derivative lawsuit concluded with the successful resolution of the matter through mediation.

       h. FLSA Wage amd Hour Litigation, 2:10-CV-00538-IPJ and subsequent arbitration case with American Arbitration Association, No. 30 160 00560 10. This collective action involving complex matters involving multiple counts and violations of the FLSA resulted in settlement.

i.       Thomas v. Firemen's Fund American Life Ins. Co., et al, CV-1995-007797.00 - consumer fraud case resulting in a jury verdict of $3.22 million dollars in front of the Honorable William A. Jackson.

j.        In re: National Arbitration Forum Trade Practices, U.S. D. Ct. Minn., MDL No. 10-2122 (PAM/JSM) - multidistrict litigation involving claims of fraudulent arbitration practices.

k.    Spivey v. First Commercial Bank, CV-1991-007862.80 - defense of commercial practices involved in collecting on mortgage, defense of claims and appellate work involving verdicts in excess of one million dollars.

  l.       Moore v. Prudential Residential Services, et al, CV-1997-000242.00 - represented consumer in sale of house fraud case, including appellate work reversing trial court which ultimately led to a $1.5 million judgment against defendant whose summary judgment was reversed by the Alabama Supreme Court.

m.    Multiple representations involving pursuit and defense of claims under FDCPA laws and related causes of action. Some of these include the following: Hardiman v. Franklin Collection Services, Inc., CV-2005-005889.00, Haire v. Franklin Collection Services, Inc., 06C-HS-0121-S, Spradley v. United Creditors Alliance, 4:1999-cv-02322,   Vaden v Great Lakes Collection Bureau, Inc., CV-1997-001444.00, Woods v. Triadvantage Credit Services, CV-2005-06910, and Tompkins v. Alliance One Receivables Management, CV-09-B-0127-S.Type your paragraph here.
Type your paragraph here.

When you suffer an injury or must defend a claim, you need the experience of the Armstrong Law Center. Allan L. Armstrong is the founder of the Center. Allan has been practicing law since 1988 and is currently admitted to practice in all the State and Federal Courts in Alabama. This includes the Alabama Supreme Court and all other courts in the State. Allan is also admitted to practice before all federal district courts in Alabama, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court.

As a lifelong resident of Birmingham, Alabama, Allan earned his undergraduate degree from the University of Alabama at Birmingham and his Juris Doctorate degree from Cumberland School of Law at Samford University. Since being admitted to the Bar in 1988, Allan has represented individuals and large and small businesses in seeking justice., Contact the Center or Allan now to determine your rights and protect your interests.

Upon graduation from Cumberland School of Law at Samford University in 1988, Mr. Armstrong began his practice in the litigation department of one of Birmingham's oldest law firms. During such time, Mr. Armstrong represented businesses of all sizes and individuals in complex business and commercial disputes.

In the mid-1990s, the Mr. Armstrong's practice became more focused on representing clients as plaintiffs and defendants in commercial and consumer disputes. After successfully representing these clients in the commercial and business context, Mr. Armstrong chose to focus his practice in the representation of plaintiffs in civil actions in Alabama and other parts of the United States. In doing so, Mr. Armstrong has represented thousands of class members or putative class members in halting abusive practices. Currently, Mr. Armstrong represents individuals and businesses as plaintiffs and defendants in most areas of the law.

Representative cases for Mr. Armstrong include the following:

a.       Rogers v. Transamerica Lender Finance, et al, CV-1995-000736.00 - class certified and undersigned counsel approved by the Honorable Roy Moore as class counsel representing individual debtors pursuing FDCPA claims. The matter successfully resolved through mediation resulting in payments to class members, payment of their attorneys fees, and related benefits of several million dollars.

         b.       Thompson v. Check Guarantee Service, CV-1995-000736.00 - represented individual debtors pursuing FDCPA claims, and received a six figure judgment on behalf of the class in front of the Honorable Judge Arthur J. Hanes.

       c.       Green Valley Chiropractic v. Barranco Enterprises, CV-2004-004766 - represented individuals in certified class, which ultimately settled in mediation, for violations TCPA.

          d.       Delta Capital Resources v. Goldberg & Associates, 2:08-CV-01701_WMA - represented defrauded investor wherein jury returned verdict in amount of $792,054.00 ($500,000.00 in punitive damages).

        e.       Assisted in numerous complex and class action cases, including, In re: Managed Care Litigation MDL 01334 (S.D. Fla.) representing nearly 700,000 of the Nation’s physicians and several state medical associations. The case, which involved civil RICO claims, expanded to include over 60 healthcare companies, and eventually led to settlements with the physicians, with benefits to the class estimated to exceed $2 billion dollars.

         f.        Counsel in one of the first cases to go to trial against a leading ephedra manufacturer, related to the dangers of ephedra-based herbal supplements. The jury returned a $4.1 million verdict tried before the Honorable William A. Acker in Birmingham, Alabama. Although later reversed on appeal, the case led to the establishment of an ephedra MDL, and the global settlement by several manufacturers of ephedra-related injury claims.

       g.       Miller v. Neurorecovery, Inc., CV-06-CV-0206-KOB - defense of this shareholder's derivative lawsuit concluded with the successful resolution of the matter through mediation.

       h. FLSA Wage amd Hour Litigation, 2:10-CV-00538-IPJ and subsequent arbitration case with American Arbitration Association, No. 30 160 00560 10. This collective action involving complex matters involving multiple counts and violations of the FLSA resulted in settlement.

i.       Thomas v. Firemen's Fund American Life Ins. Co., et al, CV-1995-007797.00 - consumer fraud case resulting in a jury verdict of $3.22 million dollars in front of the Honorable William A. Jackson.

j.        In re: National Arbitration Forum Trade Practices, U.S. D. Ct. Minn., MDL No. 10-2122 (PAM/JSM) - multidistrict litigation involving claims of fraudulent arbitration practices.

k. Spivey v. First Commercial Bank, CV-1991-007862.80 - defense of commercial practices involved in collecting on mortgage, defense of claims and appellate work involving verdicts in excess of one million dollars.

l. Moore v. Prudential Residential Services, et al, CV-1997-000242.00 - represented consumer in sale of house fraud case, including appellate work reversing trial court which ultimately led to a $1.5 million judgment against defendant whose summary judgment was reversed by the Alabama Supreme Court.

m.        Multiple representations involving pursuit and defense of claims under FDCPA laws and related causes of action. Some of these include the following: Hardiman v. Franklin Collection Services, Inc., CV-2005-005889.00, Haire v. Franklin Collection Services, Inc., 06C-HS-0121-S, Spradley v. United Creditors Alliance, 4:1999-cv-02322,   Vaden v Great Lakes Collection Bureau, Inc., CV-1997-001444.00, Woods v. Triadvantage Credit Services, CV-2005-06910, and Tompkins v. Alliance One Receivables Management, CV-09-B-0127-S.