Rueb Stoller Daniel

For individuals in the Atlanta, Georgia area seeking legal representation through the "Lawyers Near Me" platform, it is essential to conduct thorough research and consider all available information regarding potential legal counsel. This introduction aims to provide an objective overview of Rueb Stoller Daniel, located at 225 Ottley Dr NE Suite 110 in Atlanta, based on recent feedback from individuals who have identified themselves as clients of the firm. It is important to note that the following information is derived directly from publicly available online reviews and reflects the experiences shared by these individuals.

Recent client reviews regarding Rueb Stoller Daniel present a mixed picture of the firm's services. One reviewer expressed a positive experience, stating that the firm "helped me with my mass tort case" and offered a general recommendation. This suggests that some clients have found the firm to be helpful in certain types of legal matters, specifically mass tort litigation.

However, another, more detailed review presents a significantly contrasting experience, raising serious concerns about the firm's handling of at least one client's case. This review details the experience of an individual, Barbara Sweeney, who signed a contract with Dalimonte and Rueb (presumably a previous iteration or affiliated entity of Rueb Stoller Daniel) in June 2019 to represent her in a claim against the Roundup class action lawsuit. Ms. Sweeney outlined the agreement regarding fees and expenses and her initial understanding that she simply needed to await the Bayer settlement.

According to Ms. Sweeney's account, after a year had passed with minimal communication (only two correspondences and perhaps one phone call), she believed her case was progressing as expected, particularly upon learning of Bayer's decision to settle. Given her history of lung cancer (diagnosed twice, with ongoing monitoring for new nodules), the outcome of the Roundup lawsuit was likely of significant personal importance.

However, Ms. Sweeney expressed shock and dismay upon receiving a certified letter from Dalimonte Rueb, LLP, thanking her for her claim but informing her that they were unable to pursue it on her behalf. She further noted her astonishment at the firm's suggestion that she obtain other legal representation at this late stage, after a considerable amount of time had passed since the initial agreement.

In her review, Ms. Sweeney questioned the firm's lack of prior communication regarding their inability to represent her, particularly in light of the impending settlement. She also voiced her significant concern about the difficulty of finding new legal representation at such a late date, after valuable time had been spent under the impression that her claim was being handled. Ms. Sweeney characterized the firm's actions as "callous" and expressed her uncertainty about how to proceed after what she perceived as wasted time.

Based on her experience, Barbara Sweeney explicitly stated that she would "certainly never recommend this law firm to anyone." This strong negative recommendation should be carefully considered by potential clients researching legal options in the Atlanta area.

The limited information available online for Rueb Stoller Daniel primarily consists of these two contrasting reviews. The positive review offers a general endorsement for mass tort cases, while the detailed negative review raises serious concerns about communication, case handling, and the firm's decision to withdraw representation late in the process of a significant mass tort settlement. Without further information from other sources or the firm itself, it is challenging to provide a comprehensive overview of all their service areas, typical client experiences, or the overall environment of the firm.

The address provided, 225 Ottley Dr NE Suite 110, suggests a location in a business area of Atlanta. However, without additional information or descriptions of the office environment, it is not possible to provide a detailed account of the firm's physical premises.

Similarly, specific details regarding the full range of legal services offered by Rueb Stoller Daniel are not readily apparent from the provided reviews. While one review mentions assistance with a mass tort case, the other focuses specifically on a negative experience within the context of the Roundup litigation. Therefore, it is unclear what other areas of law the firm may practice in.

In terms of promotional information, the single positive review could be seen as a form of promotion, highlighting their work in mass tort cases. However, the detailed negative review significantly counteracts this, serving as a strong cautionary note. Potential clients will need to weigh these contrasting experiences carefully.

For local users in Atlanta seeking legal representation through "Lawyers Near Me," the available online reviews for Rueb Stoller Daniel present a mixed and potentially concerning picture. While one client reported a positive experience with a mass tort case, another detailed a very negative experience involving poor communication and a late withdrawal of representation in a significant class action lawsuit. Given this conflicting feedback, potential clients are strongly advised to conduct thorough due diligence, seek additional reviews or information from other sources, and carefully consider these experiences when deciding whether to contact Rueb Stoller Daniel for their legal needs. It would be prudent to inquire specifically about the firm's experience and approach in handling cases similar to their own and to seek assurances regarding communication and continuity of representation.