|
![[Key]](/local/images/key_blue_header.gif)
Date |
|
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5/16/12 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
Registered users can respond publicly to this rating
|
|
4/16/12 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
Nancy was very knowledgeable and fair-minded. Her background in mediation was clearly evident in helping to develop a gentle, fair and amicable divorce agreement. |
|
|
Registered users can respond publicly to this rating
|
|
|
10/17/10 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
NANCY GREENBERG MAY BE A VERY SMART WOMEN BUT WHEN IT COMES TO THE WELL BEING OF A CHILD SHE IS CLUELESS. SHE IS VERY DRAWN TO THE "FATHER" AND HIS AGENDA, NOT THE BEST INTREST OF THE CHILD WHICH IS WHERE HER DUTIES OF A PARENT COORDINATOR SHOULD LIE. I FEEL BAD FOR ANYONE WHO GETS "STUCK" WITH HER. |
|
|
Registered users can respond publicly to this rating
|
|
|
8/13/10 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
Horribly biased GAL. doesn't take the well being of the child into consideration at all, makes threats and bullys her way into forcing desperate people to do things her way. the report she made about us was word for word things that the the ex says, complete lies. she does not fact check, and has an archaic view of families and how children should be raised. she made promises to my child ( including calling to check on her once a week ) and never honored them. she called her ONCE in over a year. she is a disgrace and if I could sue her for malpractice ( as I am our first attorney ) I would. |
|
|
Registered users can respond publicly to this rating
|
|
|
9/12/07 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
Nancy Gold Greenberg appears as a concerned soft-spoken woman. However, she is clueless when it comes to children and can be swayed into confusion by an abusive manipulator. Her work as a guardian ad litem would be laughable if it didn't create a tragic outcome. However, judges don't take her credible and there have been a few cases where her reports were ignored. Nancy appears to be very drawn to her male client - almost to the point that she is willing to do anything in their favor. Her reports reflect that, as she will make a recommendation with no evidence to back it up. I wouldn't say she's malicious, just not terribly bright or qualified to be making intelligent decisions when it comes to child custody or vistation. |
|
|
Registered users can respond publicly to this rating
|
