Martindale Hubbell lawyer ratings: now for only $59 (operators are standing by)

When I graduated from law school, the Martindale Hubbell ratings were considered by many attorneys to be some sort of gold standard.  The Martindale Hubbell books were in almost every law firm library, and in every federal judge's library.  Whenever the judge I clerked for didn't know a lawyer in one of his cases, we'd consult those books to see where he or she graduated from law school.  The ratings were interesting, but not very helpful (as I explained once before).

Most attorneys paid to be listed in the Martindale Hubbell.  It was a good way to make yourself known to attorneys in other jurisdictions who were looking to hire counsel outside their state.  

But then one day someone invented the World Wide Web, and soon websites started sprouting up like weeds. These days almost every attorney has a website; it costs almost nothing to put one up.  If I want to know what law school an attorney went to I can look that up on their website.  Odds are I'm more interested in what kind of law they practice. But, again, that's going to be on their website.

Martindale Hubbell has a website too.  And if you pay the exorbitant fee to be listed in their books you get added to the website for free.  Some attorneys are pleased when they get an AV rating from Martindale Hubbell, and so they list that rating on their website.  This used to be prohibited under the terms of Martindale's service. The only place it could be displayed was on Martindale's website, but that website was not indexed by Google so you'd have to go there and do a special search.  So basically your online Martindale rating had an only slightly better chance of being found than a message in a bottle at sea.

Today I got a letter in the mail from Martindale Hubbell telling me that if I want to display my rating on my website I can now do it.  Yes, ladies and gentlemen, "Martindale-Hubbell, in collaboration with American Registry, LLC has created a handsome selection of Peer Review Rating Acknowledgements that allows [me] to showcase [my] Peer Review Rating while providing essential support for tomorrow's legal professionals."

Sounds too good to be true, right?  So I can now display my 'Peer Review Rating' on my website?  

Yes, but only if I pay them a $59 fee (or $199 if I want to use the specially designed icon).  That's because I don't subscribe to their service.  If I did then the "Peer Ratings Display Fee" would be included in my (very costly) subscription.

On the one hand, I'm kind of tempted to pay the fee. It'd be for only one year, but I'd get to display my MH rating on my web page.  What's $59 in the grand scheme of things?  On the other hand, I don't like supporting a dying business model.

I realize that it takes a lot of work for Martindale Hubbell to collect the lawyer ratings.  But, over the years I've seen that most lawyers get an AV or a BV rating, so there's not much distinction in getting a top rating.  Obviously, no one is going to pay to display a poor rating.  And if most lawyer had poor ratings then they'd be disinclined to pay Martindale money.  In short, as hard as Martindale works to gather and compile the ratings, the fact remains: the ratings are kind of useless.  

Sure, there are a lot of lawyers who rely on them.  A lot of lawyers follow the herd, and are reluctant to exercise critical thought or search the internet to find information. So should I pay $59 for the right to tout my Martindale Hubbell rating (which I can't reveal to you unless I pay)?  

No, I think not.

If you want to know if I'm a good lawyer, here's what I suggest you do. Research me thoroughly online. Check my website, obviously.  But then Google my name and see what I've written, and what others have written about me. Find out what kind of law I practice.  Check my LinkedIn page and see what people who have used my services say about me.  If you are really serious you can get a PACER account and look up all the cases that I've been involved in and then write down the names and phone numbers of my opposing counsel.  Call them and see if they'll tell you bad things about me (some of them might, but most probably won't).

Look, hiring a lawyer is an important decision.  If you want to hire a lawyer because he or she got a typically good rating (from a service that charges lawyers to display the rating), then go ahead.  If I were in that position, though, I'd want to get a lot more information.  Most of the information you'd need is available for free on the Internet.  

You have heard of the Internet, haven't you?

Comments

[lawrence berezin]

Ernie,

I wasn't sure where you were headed when I began reading your post; but, I enjoyed the journey. I've practiced law for 33 years. In my early years the AV rating was coveted by my peers.

I'm sorry to learn how much it's been watered down. You make some great points about how to learn about a colleague. Many different sources of info out there.

I'm a little saddened by MH's pay to play scheme. I earned my rating, as you earned yours. $59 kind of cheapens the honor. $199 for an icon is silly. We can make our own now.

Oh well, I guess Google #1 has replaced AV.

[Shalini]

Thoughtful post. Just a reminder that your Avvo Rating is still free. You can put your perfect 10 Avvo Rating badge on your blog if you choose - and that is also free!

[Adrian Baron]

Ernie,
Just a quick note to say I enjoy reading this blog. Although I have been in practice only a few years, I have come to the realization that the rating has been watered down. I am aware of sanctioned attorneys with AV ratings and 30 year veterans with undeserved BV ratings.

The latest trend to be gaining momentum seems to be AVVO where attorneys are rated from 1-10. Years of practice are listed as well as any sanctions against the attorney.

I am waiting for a lawyer's version of American Idol where clients can call in to rate attorneys.

Keep up the good work.

Adrian
http://thenutmeglawyer.blogspot.com/

[Carlton Dyce, Martindale-Hubbell]

Interesting blog Ernie. Just thought I would clarify a few things: Yes, Martindale Hubbell has introduced a Peer Review Rating display fee. In fact this fee has been around since 2007. To date, hundreds of thousands of lawyers have been rated through the Martindale-Hubbell process and that number continues to grow, and along with it the resources required to maintain this important resource – hence the fee. While $59 is a nominal amount to ask for the services delivered by Martindale-Hubbell, it was a change.

It’s important to note, however, that Martindale-Hubbell will not “un-rate an attorney” if the fee is not paid; Martindale Hubbell still includes an attorney’s listing in the Martindale Hubbell database – but the rating will not display unless the PRR fee is paid. Further, a lawyer who is rated and has not paid the admin fee can still mention their rating on their own Web site and in other marketing materials as long as they follow our guidelines. All we ask is that they adhere to the trademark specifics as spelled out in our ratings guidelines at www.martindale.com/ratings

The process of using an attorney’s peer to evaluate will not change and therefore the objective historical process has not been compromised. In the end this becomes a personal choice by each attorney whether he or she values the rating enough to pay the $59 annual fee to help us continue providing services. Peer Review Ratings are an objective indicator of a lawyer’s ethics and professional abilities—as seen through the eyes of their peers. That being said, we value all feedback from all attorneys as we work to make our products better, and we appreciate yours.

[Dave!]

I did a quick, non-scientific survey of non-lawyers that I know (I asked five people). It consisted of two questions:

1. How would you go about finding an attorney to represent you in a divorce/injury/etc. type of case.

2. Would you use Martindale-Hubbell?

Universally the answers to #1 were "Word of Mouth" followed by "Google".

The answers to #2 were also universal: "What is Martindale Hubbell".

*I* had never heard of it, either, until I became a lawyer. Perhaps, M-H should spend less time coming up with ways to nickel and dime attorneys and work on promoting themselves to clients as a valid resource. Maybe then there *would* be a reason to pay for a "peer rating". Although, I still have doubts about that, even then.

[John Davis]

Dave,

Perhaps if you asked them about Lawyers.com they would have known what you are talking about. Martindale-Hubbell is the brand that is used for Lawyers while Lawyers.com is the brand for consumers. Even if they use Google, they are likely to come to Lawyers.com in order to choose and compare lawyers.

[daniel]

Great post!

Daniel

[David Knott]

My head is spinning! Let me first say I work for Martindale Hubbell/Lawyers.com/LexisNexis. This wide array of opinions clearly demonstrates that we all make decisions differently. An attorney can never say how his/her greatest client might go about evaluating their skills; therefor, providing as many ways as possible is a good idea. $59/yr or $5900/yr? If it helps you get one client its worth it. Spread wide across as many medias as possible so the person looking for help has the opportunity to consider you.
Regarding "the dying business model," check out http://www.marketinglawyers.org/about/. It doesn't seem that you're aware of what our business model is these days.

[Micki Parkhill]

Hello Ernie!!!

You sounded so jaded I had to read the entire article. Relax, the Martindale-Hubbell is an historical reference system. I happen to be very proud of my 2000 Martindale-Hubbell collection I packed into the back of my car ... (the set that had my name in it). It was the last year that paralegals were allowed in the attorney editions. What made is sweeter was my buddy, the current County Attorney, was offered the set four years prior to my criminal act. Now I have my name in the Kentucky Edition for my children and grandchildren. And the books are gold on the outer pages. I am going to tell my kids I have stashed money in them so they have to go through the whole darn set to find the cash!!!!!

[Tom]

I saw a post on Martindale that they've rated "hundreds of thousands" of attorneys. At $59/year/attorney that's at least about $12 million/year they're raking in from this scheme (if everyone pays). I understand the rising costs of rating and maintaining a database, but $12 mil/year makes it sound like a money-making scheme, pure and simple