Rating = 0/0 I had…read morethe most unprofessional experience with the Workmens Compensation lawyer Kurt Knisley. He violated several parts of the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct by threatening to put a lien on my claim, not once, but twice, for simply asking questions and expressing concerns. He violated the following core rules: Rule 1.2 (Scope of representation; allocation of authority) The client decides the objectives of representation, including whether to settle; the lawyer must consult with the client about means and keep the client reasonably informed. Rule 1.4 (Communication)Requires the lawyer to keep the client reasonably informed and to explain matters so the client can make informed decisions. Violation: Kurt Knisley did not inform me nor provide the details of the settlement demand until after the document was sent to the Respondent. He provided no option for the demand letter to be tailored according to my needs. Kurt threatened to withdraw as counsel and to place a lien on my claim in response to me asking him why this was done. Kurt Knisley decided to try to intimidate, instead of communicating and consulting. Rule 1.5 (Fees)Fees and expenses must be reasonable, and any lien for fees must be based on a valid fee agreement and applicable law. Violation: Kurt Knisley used the lien primarily as leverage to silence my concerns. This is inconsistent with the requirement that fee practices be fair and reasonable. Rule 1.16 (Declining or terminating representation)Lists when a lawyer may withdraw but requires withdrawal to be done in a way that protects the client's interests. Violation: Kurt Knisley used the threat of withdrawal and lien in a way that materially harmed my case simply because I challenged his strategy and asked questions. Rule 8.4 (Misconduct)Prohibits conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, and conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. Violation:The lien threat was knowingly misleading about Kurt Knisley's actual intention and was mainly used to coerce me into silence or agreement. I would not recommend Kurt for any Workmens Compensation case on these grounds. Kurts threats were retaliatory and coercive. A lawyer should not try to punish a client simply for disagreeing or asking questions. After all, it is a lawyers responsibility to keep clients informed, and represent their lawful objectives diligently.

Excellent work. Timely, precise and thorough. Will use them again if needed. Very prompt in…read moreresponding to our call.

Chris Yeager is an incredible human being and top notch worker's compensation lawyer. Chris was…read morerecommended to me by a fellow coworker who was injured in a similar manner at our hospital, and she told me "I would've been so lost without him, and probably ended up paying for everything myself." I have never been more grateful for a recommendation in my life. Navigating worker's compensation is already difficult and my head injury made everything a million times worse. Chris and I worked together for over a year to fight in the courtroom, in the doctors offices, in every document for me to receive the care that I needed. And when I say fight, I do mean genuine strategy meeting involved, court jargon used calmly yet effectively (we had a positive outcome in 95% of our 10+ hearings) in the face of both of us constantly having our integrity questioned. If you want a team that will give 110% it is Chris and his paralegal Heather who will help navigate every logistic nightmare, shady Independent Medical Exam orders, and the thousands of documents, tasks, and to-dos that come with a worker's compensation case for a complicated injury requiring long term treatment. Chris's knowledge of the benefits available to me allowed me to have access to resources and aid, I had no idea about on my own. Chris is kind, empathetic, hard-working, and a force to be reckoned with in the courtroom. I can't recommend Chris and Heather (and I'm sure everyone else) enough!!