What to send
- The exact page URL and statement at issue.
- The proposed correction in plain language.
- A primary or direct source supporting it.
- Your identity and relationship to the subject.
- Whether confidential documents are available for controlled review.
How we respond
We acknowledge a complete request, preserve the existing edition record, examine the new evidence under the same hierarchy used in the original audit, and document material changes. We do not remove accurate criticism because it is unfavorable.
What counts as a material correction
A change is material when it alters a firm’s eligibility, score, rank, evidence level, named lawyer, office status, published result, or another conclusion a reader may rely on. Spelling, punctuation, and formatting fixes can be made without changing the research record, provided they do not alter meaning.
How evidence is reviewed
New material is checked against the same source hierarchy used for the original page. A direct court record can outweigh a marketing summary; an award-provider record can clarify the lawyer, practice, market, and year; and a dated official contact page can resolve an office or roster claim. We explain unresolved conflicts rather than selecting the most favorable version.
Firm responses
A firm can submit missing verdict records, award-provider URLs, roster updates, office details, review-listing URLs, fee information, and an on-record response. Nonresponse is described only as a lack of supplemental evidence.
Contact setup in progress
Ranking changes
A correction can change a score or position when the evidence warrants it. A firm cannot preserve a rank by objecting, and a competitor cannot lower another firm’s rank without stronger evidence. Material changes receive a date and explanation so readers can understand what changed.