Jump to Navigation

Contact

At Martin D. Haverly, Attorney at Law, we place the highest value on our clients' needs and goals. Through clear communication and careful analysis of each situation, we help clients identify their goals and take steps toward achieving them.

Our firm will give you an individualized approach to your legal problem. We work hard to resolve cases quickly, affordably and in a way that positions you for success and stability.

Contact our lawyers for assistance with any employment law or business matter. We also handle personal injury cases, wills and estate planning. Reach us at 302-529-0121 or by filling out the email contact form below. Our office is conveniently located in the suburbs just outside the city of Wilmington.

Bold labels and This graphic indicates a required field. indicate required information.

Personal Information
Contact Preferences

How would you like to be contacted?
Check all that apply.

How Can We Help You?

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

Privacy Policy

Martin D. Haverly, Attorney at Law
Brandywood Plaza, 2500 Grubb Road
Suite 240-B

Wilmington, DE 19810

Phone: 302-529-0121
Fax: 302-529-1123
Wilmington Law Office Map

View Cases

  • Sheridan v. E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 100 F.3d 1061 (3rd Cir. 1996) (en banc) (Plaintiff's jury verdict and the "pretext only" paradigm for proof of intentional discrimination established).
  • Hawkins v. Division of State Police, et al., C.A. No. 99-297-SLR (Religious discrimination case which successfully obtained an offer of judgment and caused the State to stop using the MMPI-1.
  • Miller v. Daimler Chrysler Corp., C. A. No. 01-827-JJF (D.Del. 2003) (Race Discrimination claim survived Motion for Summary Judgment).
  • Panaro v. J.C. Penny, Inc., C.A. 01C-02-010 JOH, 2002 WL 130692 (Del. Super. 2002)(In a personal injury case, admission into evidence of direct examination of deceased deponent/plaintiff does not.
  • Price, et al. v. L. Aaron Chaffinch, et al., C.A. No. 04-956-GMS, 2006 WL 1313178 (D.Del. 2006) (First Amendment Retaliation, Petitions Clause and Defamation Claims survived Motion for Summary Judgment).
  • Reyes v. Freebery, 141 Fed. Appx. 49 (3d Cir. 2005) (per curiam) remanding to District Court to explain its restrictions on the public's right to access to judicial records and counsel's First Amendment.
  • Underwood v. Sear Roebuck and Co., 343 F.Supp.2d 259 (D.Del. 2004) (Gender discrimination claim survived Motion for Summary Judgment).
  • Shotzberger v. State of Delaware Dept. Of Correction, 2004 WL 758354 (D.Del. Jan. 30, 2004) (Gender discrimination claim survived Motion for Summary Judgement).
  • Stull v. Thomas S. Neuberger, P.A., 2003 WL 21481016 (Del. Super. Febr. 28, 2003) (Effect of Delaware accord and satisfaction law on a contract for legal services).
View More Cases

Case Evaluation Form

Bold labels are required.

Contact Information
disclaimer.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

close

Privacy Policy