Methodology

Summary

"Featured" attorneys are selected based on a combined signal of publicly available Google rating and review count. Inclusion is not an endorsement. Attorneys who have claimed their listing may request review of their featured status; criteria are never changed in exchange for payment.

Listing information on InjuryBurnLawyer.com is compiled from publicly available sources including state bar directories, court records, and publicly posted review aggregates. Facts are reproduced without endorsement. Attorneys may claim their listing to update accuracy, or request removal at any time.

How we pick the metros we cover

We cover metros where there is meaningful consumer search demand for burn injury legal help. Our candidate list is derived from keyword research (SEMrush and Google Keyword Planner volume data) for queries such as “burn injury lawyer” and related long-tail variants, scoped to city and state modifiers. A metro has to clear a minimum monthly search-volume threshold to justify a dedicated page.

Volume data is refreshed periodically. Coverage expands or contracts as demand shifts; we do not add pages simply to increase surface area.

How we find attorneys

We identify candidate attorneys for each metro through a three-step process:

1. Public-web search via Firecrawl. We query the open web for firms and individual attorneys that publicly represent themselves as handling burn injury matters in the target metro.
2. Deduplication by registered domain. Multiple mentions of the same firm across review sites, local citations, and press coverage are collapsed to a single firm record keyed on the registered apex domain.
3. Filtering. We filter out results that are themselves aggregator directories (Yelp, Super Lawyers, Avvo, FindLaw, Justia, etc.), results from firms outside the target metro, and results that clearly do not practice in this area.

Factual fields associated with each attorney (firm name, office city, years of practice, listed practice areas, public Google rating, and public review count) come from the public sources that surfaced them.

How we select “Featured” listings

A subset of listings on each metro page is surfaced as Featured. Featured listings are chosen by a composite signal computed from three publicly observable factors:

• Public Google rating (stars).
• Public Google review count.
• Stated years of practice.

The composite is rating-weighted (a firm with many reviews and a high rating outranks a firm with a handful of perfect reviews) and is recomputed when the underlying public values change. Every featured listing carries a disclosed tooltip explaining why it is featured.

Featured status is not for sale. Claiming a listing (which is free) does not change a firm’s featured status, and no payment of any kind modifies the composite or the weights.

How we generate biographical content

Listing summaries are drafted by an AI model (Claude, from Anthropic) from a short list of factual fields only. The model receives fields like firm name, office city, years of practice, and listed practice areas. It does not receive scraped biography text from the firm’s own website, from review sites, or from any third-party directory. It does not receive case outcomes, settlement amounts, or verdicts.

The prompt explicitly forbids:

• Outcome claims (“won millions,” “recovered X for clients,” etc.).
• Superlatives (“best,” “top,” “leading,” “#1,” “renowned,” “aggressive”).
• Invented credentials, certifications, awards, or affiliations.
• Promises about the reader’s case or outcome.

We also apply variety-enforcement prompting so that summaries across a metro do not reuse the same sentence structure, opener, or closing phrase. Summaries are treated as draft copy; any attorney who claims a listing can edit or replace the text outright.

What we emit in structured data — and what we don’t

We emit LegalService and LocalBusiness structured data consistent with the public information on each listing. We deliberately do not emit AggregateRating or Review structured data derived from Google’s review corpus. Google’s structured data policy requires that aggregate ratings in JSON-LD originate on the publishing site itself; republishing another platform’s ratings as your own structured data is a policy violation. Where ratings are shown visibly on our pages, they are attributed to their source and presented as informational.

Why we don’t route consumer inquiries

Routing consumer inquiries to specific attorneys — matching, ranking by “best fit,” forwarding intake forms, or selling leads — is what turns a directory into a lawyer referral service. Lawyer referral services are separately regulated in most states (and in some, such as California, require state bar certification or are reserved to bar-operated programs). By design we do not intake consumer matters, we do not forward them, and we do not charge per-lead. Visitors contact attorneys directly. That classification boundary is a core product decision, not an oversight.

Corrections and removal

Any attorney or firm can request a correction, claim a listing, or have a listing removed. Removal requests are processed within five (5) business days; we do not require a justification and we do not ask for a fee.

• Claim your listing — no cost, lets you correct facts and add contact info.
• Request removal — removes the listing from our directory.

What we don’t do

• We don’t use superlatives (“best,” “top-rated,” “#1”) in editorial copy.
• We don’t make outcome claims or promise results.
• We don’t sell featured placement.
• We don’t operate a consumer intake form.
• We don’t forward, sell, or share consumer contact information.