Recently, I wrote an article about Avvo.com winning a lawsuit filed in the New Jersey courts requesting that the Garden State’s bar association turn over records of active lawyers practicing in that state. After writing that article I decided to take a further look at what Avvo.com could do for my law practice, and so I began to build up my profile on the website (since it is "free" – is anything really "free" in this world). As I began to send out "requests" for peer and client endorsements (in the hope that my "rating" would skyrocket to a booming "10" and people who want my services would flock to my office) I wondered if this "rating" system is a fair and accurate depiction of my talents as a lawyer.
As I was doing some research for this blog entry, one thing dawned on me that could prove many critic’s theories on why Avvo.com is not a good rating system to gauge lawyer effectiveness: MY NAME. Narcissism aside, there are not one, not two, but THREE "Seaton Maurice Daly’s" who just happend to be licensed attorneys in the State of Washington, and who happen to have a law degree from Gonzaga University School of Law. The only problem for the general public: two of the "Seaton’s" have passed away and are no longer "practicing law." While some may think practicing law from the grave is an incredible talent worthy of representation, most prefer living lawyers to handle their mundane problems. Here in lies the fundamental issue: is Avvo.com truly providing a beneficial service to the general public, or are they subjecting the public to misinformation?
Rating the Business Transactional Lawyer: Is it fair and accurate?
Mr. Robert Ambrogi is a fellow blogger and MA attorney who wrote a strong criticism of Avvo.com on June 5, 2007. I shared many of the same concerns that Mr. Ambrogi expressed in his blog, and then after reading a response letter by Avvo.com CEO, Mark Britton, to an article published in De Novo (a newsletter for Young Lawyers in WA State), my interest on this topic grew. As a transactional attorney with a practice emphasis in privacy laws, I am extremely conflicted about the efficacy over how much information needs to be inputed in order to boost my ratings appeal. Litigation attorneys can put their "cases" on their Avvo.com profile, since it is already a matter of public record, but transactional attorneys need to be more discreet in anouncing to the general public all the latest and greatest IPO’s they churned out for a myriad of reasons. Some clients may not want their business transactions and activities published or associated with a forum like Avvo.com, and lawyers may be hesitant to place information about transactions they have done without the client’s permission. For example, let’s say I do 10 transactions over the course of a month, but only 2 customers grant me permission to associate their company with Avvo.com, the general public will only be seeing 20% of my actual work product. Is this an accurate depiction?
Additionally, I may be a "Young Lawyer," but I have acquired an incredible amount of practical business experience that makes me just as business savvy as the lawyer who has been doing this for 30 years. I’ve been in the client’s shoes, I’ve stood where they’ve stood – shouldn’t that be taken into consideration? As a transactional business lawyer, who once was an operations manager for a data security company in Chicago and Seattle, I personally dealt with clients ranging from the Chicago Board of Trade, Microsoft, Boeing, and other Fortune 500 companies, to 5 of the 6 largest banks in the U.S. That should merit some sort of credentials in boosting my Avvo.com "rating". There are practicing lawyers of 20 plus years who have never known what it’s like to sell a widget, maintain a balance sheet, generate revenue, allocate marketing dollars, seek angel funding, or collaborate on a joint venture. A managing partner at a major firm who has been with that law firm for 20 years and who has an Avvo.com rating of "10" may not understand their client’s problems any better than me, because afterall, being a lawyer is a "profession" not a "business." Thus, is this an accurate depcition?
Another ironic point that Mr. Ambrogi makes and is worth mentioning:
"Supreme Court Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Samuel Alito each receive overall scores of 6.5 out of 10 and ratings for experience and trustworthiness of three stars out of five. By contrast, Avvo CEO Mark Britton is given a score of 8 out of 10 and experience and trustworthiness ratings of four out of five. Are we to conclude, then, that Mr. Britton would be a better choice of lawyer than either Justice Ginsburg or Justice Alito? Avvo board member and Stanford Law professor Deborah Rhode is rated a perfect 10 and given five stars for experience and trustworthiness. Harvard Law Dean Elena Kagan earns only a 6.4 rating and three stars for experience and trustworthiness. Should Prof. Rhode take over Dean Kagan’s job?"
The reliability of the Avvo product can easily be called into question, and because the legal profession is called to public service, is Avvo.com potentially subjecting itself to litigation by misleading the general public on attorney information?
Anonymous Endorsements May Affect Lawyer’s Goodwill
Another interesting component to Avvo.com, is the ability of a client to post an endorsement of their attorney without having to leave a name or require any sort of verification that they indeed were an actual client. I am not going to attempt to get into the potential defamation issues that could arise with the posting of false information, but what happens if a client libels the lawyer on his/her Avvo.com profile? Why do my clients have to agree to accept "advertising" e-mails in exchange for helping me boost my rating on the website? Some clients could see this as being too intrusive, and discourage future dealings. I am amazed that up until this point, we have not seen any class action litigation against Avvo.com for publishing libelous content. Reviews and criticims have long been protected free speech, but when it affects a lawyer’s goodwill, due to a false statement, then identifiable harm and damage to reputation has been committed. The checks and balances need to be in place, not only on the lawyer, but also on Avvo.com.
Mr. Britton, in the March, 2008, issue of De Novo commented on an article written by a classmate of mine in law school, Ms. Laura Chuang. He tries to make the argument that Avvo.com is the "best friend" of every young lawyer in Washington – essentially because its FREE. Mr. Britton adds that the hardest part for young lawyers is "establishing a presence" in the marketplace, and a "free" Avvo rating is supposed to increase that exposure, as long as I upload information about me, which may or may not boost my rating.
What happens if you are a criminal defense attorney who represents clientele that is not looked upon "favorably" by the public? Would Jane Q. Smith, a respected IT consultant from Mercer Island, WA, charged with a DUI, decide to hire Mr. Joseph Attorney, an Avvo rated "10" lawyer, on the recommendation of an anonymous person, who happens to be a convicted sex-offender prior to Mr. Attorney representing him on a DUI case that he lost? It’s doubtful. Representation in the legal profession is not black and white. The expectations of our clients at the beginning of representation usually changes by the time representation has ended. Does this make someone a bad attorney?
Ultimately, when it comes to legal services, the best form of advertising for lawyers is their work product. No rating system – Avvo.com, Martindale Hubbell, or otherwise – will be able to accurately and fairly determine a lawyers qualifications. The general public should do their own research and determine whether a lawyer is suitable for their needs or not.
Mr. Amrogi’s blog can be accessed via the following link: Bravo for Avvo? Not So Quick