The above review is invalid as the reviewer was not the person who hired Andrew Knuth in the case it is referring to as I, the petitioner, hired him. Andrew Knuth was hired to cover a very difficult and complicated custody case almost a year and a half ago after firing a different lawyer who did not fight for my child when the respondent lost our child to DHS and I was given primary custody. Andrew Knuth was very open about what would be expected during the court hearings and was prompt at letting me know what was going on. We were granted Concurrent Jurisdiction. Heartbreakingly, during the district hearing the courts believed the respondent despite the truth, facts, and medical evidence provided by Andrew and myself. Andrew worked hard and did his absolute best in my case even though the outcome was not what was desired. I wish this part of the state of Iowa were more father friendly. I would recommend him to others.

We came across Mr Knuth awhile back when my cases were first fresh. Mr Knuth knew that one of the professionals involved in the investigation was represented at an earlier date by Mr Knuth. Normally this would be a conflict of interest, however Mr Knuth decided to try and use this to his advantage. During the course of the case, Mr Knuth would file motion after motion, nothing with any weight behind it, just opinion. During the trial Mr Knuth really seemed like he was overwhelmed and not ready, despite pushing for an earlier trial date. He had only 3 witnesses called, and 2 pieces of evidence, on a case that had been open for more than 2 years. The witnesses were not credible in the fact that they were either related to the petitioner or represented by Mr Knuth at one time or another. In the final order, the judge even called it out and said he still had yet to file 3 pieces of evidence he said he would file. After which he did. I believe he went into the case under prepared and over confident and not only ended up losing but also having the judge go In favor of the respondent.

The above review is invalid as the reviewer was not the person who hired Andrew Knuth in the case it is referring to as I, the petitioner, hired him. Andrew Knuth was hired to cover a very difficult and complicated custody case almost a year and a half ago after firing a different lawyer who did not fight for my child when the respondent lost our child to DHS and I was given primary custody. Andrew Knuth was very open about what would be expected during the court hearings and was prompt at letting me know what was going on. We were granted Concurrent Jurisdiction. Heartbreakingly, during the district hearing the courts believed the respondent despite the truth, facts, and medical evidence provided by Andrew and myself. Andrew worked hard and did his absolute best in my case even though the outcome was not what was desired. I wish this part of the state of Iowa were more father friendly. I would recommend him to others.

We came across Mr Knuth awhile back when my cases were first fresh. Mr Knuth knew that one of the professionals involved in the investigation was represented at an earlier date by Mr Knuth. Normally this would be a conflict of interest, however Mr Knuth decided to try and use this to his advantage. During the course of the case, Mr Knuth would file motion after motion, nothing with any weight behind it, just opinion. During the trial Mr Knuth really seemed like he was overwhelmed and not ready, despite pushing for an earlier trial date. He had only 3 witnesses called, and 2 pieces of evidence, on a case that had been open for more than 2 years. The witnesses were not credible in the fact that they were either related to the petitioner or represented by Mr Knuth at one time or another. In the final order, the judge even called it out and said he still had yet to file 3 pieces of evidence he said he would file. After which he did. I believe he went into the case under prepared and over confident and not only ended up losing but also having the judge go In favor of the respondent.

The above review is invalid as the reviewer was not the person who hired Andrew Knuth in the case it is referring to as I, the petitioner, hired him. Andrew Knuth was hired to cover a very difficult and complicated custody case almost a year and a half ago after firing a different lawyer who did not fight for my child when the respondent lost our child to DHS and I was given primary custody. Andrew Knuth was very open about what would be expected during the court hearings and was prompt at letting me know what was going on. We were granted Concurrent Jurisdiction. Heartbreakingly, during the district hearing the courts believed the respondent despite the truth, facts, and medical evidence provided by Andrew and myself. Andrew worked hard and did his absolute best in my case even though the outcome was not what was desired. I wish this part of the state of Iowa were more father friendly. I would recommend him to others.

We came across Mr Knuth awhile back when my cases were first fresh. Mr Knuth knew that one of the professionals involved in the investigation was represented at an earlier date by Mr Knuth. Normally this would be a conflict of interest, however Mr Knuth decided to try and use this to his advantage. During the course of the case, Mr Knuth would file motion after motion, nothing with any weight behind it, just opinion. During the trial Mr Knuth really seemed like he was overwhelmed and not ready, despite pushing for an earlier trial date. He had only 3 witnesses called, and 2 pieces of evidence, on a case that had been open for more than 2 years. The witnesses were not credible in the fact that they were either related to the petitioner or represented by Mr Knuth at one time or another. In the final order, the judge even called it out and said he still had yet to file 3 pieces of evidence he said he would file. After which he did. I believe he went into the case under prepared and over confident and not only ended up losing but also having the judge go In favor of the respondent.