New Jersey Disclaimer - Award Methodology
Inclusion in Best Lawyers is based entirely on peer-review. The methodology
is designed to capture, as accurately as possible, the consensus opinion
of leading lawyers about the professional abilities of their colleagues
within the same geographical area and legal practice area. Best Lawyers
employs a sophisticated, conscientious, rational, and transparent survey
process designed to elicit meaningful and substantive evaluations of the
quality of legal services.
The U.S.News – Best Lawyers "Best Law Firms" rankings are based on a rigorous evaluation process that includes
the collection of client and lawyer evaluations, peer review from leading
attorneys in their field, and review of additional information provided
by law firms as part of the formal submission process. To be eligible
for a ranking in a particular practice area and metro region, a law firm
must have at least one lawyer who is included in Best Lawyers in that
particular practice area and metro.
Super Lawyers selects attorneys using a patented multiphase selection process.
Peer nominations and evaluations are combined with independent research.
Each candidate is evaluated on 12 indicators of peer recognition and professional
achievement. Selections are made on an annual, state-by-state basis. The
objective is to create a credible, comprehensive and diverse listing of
outstanding attorneys that can be used as a resource for attorneys and
consumers searching for legal counsel.
Martindale-Hubbell facilitates secure online peer review surveys of lawyers
across multiple jurisdictions and geographic locations, in similar areas
of practice as the lawyer being reviewed. Reviewers are asked to assess
their colleagues' general ethical standards and legal ability in a
specific area of practice. A confidential threshold number of qualified
responses is required to achieve a Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review RatingTM.
Since the Million Dollar Advocates Forum was founded in 1993, membership
has been based upon strict and objective standards. Each applicant is
required to complete a detailed application demonstrating that he or she
has met the basic qualification of having acted as Principal Counsel (as
that term is defined in the membership application) in one or more cases
which resulted in a final judgment (not subject to appeal or modification),
award or settlement in favor of his or her client in the amount of one
million dollars or more. In 2007, in response to requests from members,
the Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum was added with regard to cases
of two million dollars or more.
Applicants certify, as members of the Bar, that the information contained
in the application is true. It is the policy of the Million Dollar Advocates
Forum that any false statement of a material fact in the application would
represent an attempt by an applicant to hold himself or herself out as
possessing experience and qualifications which were not truthful and accurate
and, as such, would constitute a serious act of professional misconduct
which would warrant disciplinary action by the Bar.
Each application is reviewed by experienced trial counsel. Additional or
supporting information may be required, and applicants who do not clearly
qualify are denied membership. If membership is denied, fees paid by the
applicant are refunded.
The Avvo Rating is our effort to evaluate a lawyer’s background based
on the information available in an attorney’s Avvo profile. We create
the rating using a model that considers information the lawyer has included
on their profile in addition to information we collect from public sources
like state bar associations and lawyer websites. Any information that
affects the Avvo Rating is visible in an attorney’s profile.
The Avvo Rating is based only on the information we have collected and
that the attorney has provided, so we don’t recommend the Avvo Rating
as the only piece of information you use to evaluate whether an attorney
is right for you. The rating is a tool that provides a snapshot assessment
of a lawyer’s background, and should be considered alongside other
information such as client reviews and peer endorsements.
No aspect of this advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court
of New Jersey.