Stephen Canders
N/A
Licensed for 49 years
Law Degree
Awards
Primary Practice Area
Business
Language
English
About
Practices Areas
Criminal Defense
Intellectual Property
Business
Language
English
Contact
Reviews
To be clear, I was NEVER a client of Mr. Canders, nor would I ever be or would I ever recommend anyone else to him. On the contrary, I, like Mr. Canders, am an attorney. Mr. Canders has indeed been disciplined professionally, despite your contrary information on your site. He received a public reprimand from the Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar in or about 1992. The reprimand is published although not online because such disciplinary matters did not begin to be available online until the early to mid-2000's. Mr. Canders has in the past posted materials publicly outside the windows of his office in downtown Kennebunk, Maine, either denigrating another lawyer or even a judge and/or touting his own arrogant self-image without ever disclosing in such fashion his own public discipline. In my opinion and experience, he is very snooty, catty and critical of others, especially other attorneys including the lawyers at Bergen & Parkinson in Kennebunk. As an attorney myself who has dealt with Mr. Canders, I can also say that in my opinion he does not seem in some instances to even be able to comprehend why judicial decisions unfavorable to his clients are appropriate or why a legal position or use of the discovery process by him is quite needlessly inappropriate, offensive, harmful and unproductive, as well as wasteful of the time of others.
To be clear, I was NEVER a client of Mr. Canders, nor would I ever be or would I ever recommend anyone else to him. On the contrary, I, like Mr. Canders, am an attorney. Mr. Canders has indeed been disciplined professionally, despite your contrary information on your site. He received a public reprimand from the Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar in or about 1992. The reprimand is published although not online because such disciplinary matters did not begin to be available online until the early to mid-2000's. Mr. Canders has in the past posted materials publicly outside the windows of his office in downtown Kennebunk, Maine, either denigrating another lawyer or even a judge and/or touting his own arrogant self-image without ever disclosing in such fashion his own public discipline. In my opinion and experience, he is very snooty, catty and critical of others, especially other attorneys including the lawyers at Bergen & Parkinson in Kennebunk. As an attorney myself who has dealt with Mr. Canders, I can also say that in my opinion he does not seem in some instances to even be able to comprehend why judicial decisions unfavorable to his clients are appropriate or why a legal position or use of the discovery process by him is quite needlessly inappropriate, offensive, harmful and unproductive, as well as wasteful of the time of others.
To be clear, I was NEVER a client of Mr. Canders, nor would I ever be or would I ever recommend anyone else to him. On the contrary, I, like Mr. Canders, am an attorney. Mr. Canders has indeed been disciplined professionally, despite your contrary information on your site. He received a public reprimand from the Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar in or about 1992. The reprimand is published although not online because such disciplinary matters did not begin to be available online until the early to mid-2000's. Mr. Canders has in the past posted materials publicly outside the windows of his office in downtown Kennebunk, Maine, either denigrating another lawyer or even a judge and/or touting his own arrogant self-image without ever disclosing in such fashion his own public discipline. In my opinion and experience, he is very snooty, catty and critical of others, especially other attorneys including the lawyers at Bergen & Parkinson in Kennebunk. As an attorney myself who has dealt with Mr. Canders, I can also say that in my opinion he does not seem in some instances to even be able to comprehend why judicial decisions unfavorable to his clients are appropriate or why a legal position or use of the discovery process by him is quite needlessly inappropriate, offensive, harmful and unproductive, as well as wasteful of the time of others.