Case Outcomes
Verified settlements and verdicts from the last 36 months. Amounts are banded by injury severity and liability posture. Lifetime “billions recovered” banners without a year are ignored.
Our Methodology
ClaimIndex Score is built on 6 weighted pillars designed to reflect what matters most to injury victims.
100Total Score
-
Case OutcomesAverage payout & win rate35%
-
Client ExperienceReviews, satisfaction & NPS20%
-
ResponsivenessSpeed of initial response15%
-
TransparencyFee clarity & communication10%
-
Experience & ScaleYears in practice & case volume10%
-
Licensing & ComplianceStates licensed & discipline record10%
How we apply the weights
Every firm starts at zero. We do not sell placement. Recoveries are severity-adjusted so a high volume of minor auto files cannot outrank catastrophic-injury work. Below is the scoring note for each pillar — the same math the table uses.
Client Experience
Review quality after spam filtering, complaint ratios where public, and whether clients report understanding the fee before they signed. Star averages alone are not enough.
Responsiveness
Median hours to first attorney contact after intake — not a call-center callback, not a chatbot. Firms that hide who will handle the file lose here.
Transparency
Whether the contingency percentage, cost treatment, and any post-filing step-up are in writing and findable. Oral “we’ll talk fees later” scores poorly.
Experience & Scale
Years in the practice area that is being ranked, plus volume that matches that area. A huge PI mill does not automatically beat a focused catastrophic shop.
Licensing & Compliance
Active licenses in the states shown on the row, plus public discipline. A national brand with one home-state license will not rank as a 50-state option.
Guardrails
Exclusions, cadence, and challenges
What never enters the score
Ad spend, paid directories, Super Lawyers, Avvo, and any “preferred partner” package. Referral volume from other lawyers is not a quality signal here.
Monthly refresh
Scores are designed to recompute monthly. A late submission waits for the next run unless it corrects a clear factual error (wrong fee, wrong states).
Evidence, not pressure
Firms challenge a number by sending a docket or fee schedule through data submissions. Phone campaigns and media kits are not a scoring input.
Methodology questions
Why is case outcomes only 35%?
Because a huge average recovery can mean the firm declines ordinary files. Client care, speed, fee clarity, and license footprint are the difference between a good headline and a usable shortlist.
Do you severity-adjust so small cases don’t punish a firm?
The opposite problem is the one we watch: unadjusted averages reward shops that only take catastrophic files. We band outcomes so volume of modest files and quality of large files can both be seen — then you still filter by practice area.
Can weights change if a firm sponsors the site?
No. There is no sponsorship product that touches the score. If that ever changed, it would be disclosed on this page first. Today the answer is simply no.
Are the current table numbers live verified rankings?
No. This build is a prototype with fictional firm names. The weights and the table UI are the product; the dataset is a stand-in until verified files are loaded.
See the score in the table.
Same pillars, applied to every row.