#1 in this cohort
Torgenson Law
88.4score
- Rating
- 5/5
- Analyzed
- 636
- Maps
- #4
Practice basis: Profile + review context. Evidence depth: strong. These are observed public signals, not a specialization or outcome finding.
Review full office evidence →Direct answer · depth-50 consumer intelligence
Compare Car Accident law firms in Phoenix, AZ
Torgenson Law (88.4/100), Lebovitz Law Group (86.1/100), Gallagher & Kennedy Injury Lawyers (84.7/100) have the three highest Review Evidence Scores among 40 qualified offices in Law Leaderboard’s fixed Phoenix car accident cohort. The score compares public-review evidence; it does not measure legal ability, credentials, outcomes, or fit.
40qualified offices
17,818review texts analyzed
70.3median evidence score
80%of discovered offices qualified
Release 2026.08.12-r4 · fixed cohort · published 2026-08-12 · minimum publication gate: 8 qualified offices
Fast comparison
Top five by Review Evidence Score
| Rank / office | Score | Rating | Tracked reviews | Texts analyzed | Practice evidence | Maps visibility |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1Torgenson Law | 88.4 | 5 | 720 | 636 | Profile + review context | #4 |
| #2Lebovitz Law Group | 86.1 | 5 | 182 | 160 | Published practice evidence | #36 |
| #3Gallagher & Kennedy Injury Lawyers | 84.7 | 4.9 | 148 | 143 | Published practice evidence | #47 |
| #4Kelly Law Team Phoenix | 84.1 | 5 | 334 | 319 | Profile + review context | #1 |
| #5Harris Injury Law | 83.8 | 4.9 | 130 | 106 | Profile + review context | #28 |
Maps visibility is shown separately and is never used to calculate the Review Evidence Score.
Leading office profiles
Each profile combines score depth, practice-signal basis, and a separate visibility observation. Read the office page before making a shortlist.
#2 in this cohort
Lebovitz Law Group
86.1score
- Rating
- 5/5
- Analyzed
- 160
- Maps
- #36
Practice basis: Published practice evidence. Evidence depth: moderate. These are observed public signals, not a specialization or outcome finding.
Review full office evidence →#3 in this cohort
Gallagher & Kennedy Injury Lawyers
84.7score
- Rating
- 4.9/5
- Analyzed
- 143
- Maps
- #47
Practice basis: Published practice evidence. Evidence depth: moderate. These are observed public signals, not a specialization or outcome finding.
Review full office evidence →#4 in this cohort
Kelly Law Team Phoenix
84.1score
- Rating
- 5/5
- Analyzed
- 319
- Maps
- #1
Practice basis: Profile + review context. Evidence depth: strong. These are observed public signals, not a specialization or outcome finding.
Review full office evidence →#5 in this cohort
Harris Injury Law
83.8score
- Rating
- 4.9/5
- Analyzed
- 106
- Maps
- #28
Practice basis: Profile + review context. Evidence depth: moderate. These are observed public signals, not a specialization or outcome finding.
Review full office evidence →#6 in this cohort
Hirsch & Lyon
79.9score
- Rating
- 4.9/5
- Analyzed
- 294
- Maps
- #26
Practice basis: Published practice evidence. Evidence depth: strong. These are observed public signals, not a specialization or outcome finding.
Review full office evidence →#7 in this cohort
Shapiro Law Team
79.8score
- Rating
- 5/5
- Analyzed
- 789
- Maps
- #30
Practice basis: Profile + review context. Evidence depth: strong. These are observed public signals, not a specialization or outcome finding.
Review full office evidence →#8 in this cohort
Wyatt Injury Law Personal Injury Lawyers
79.1score
- Rating
- 5/5
- Analyzed
- 91
- Maps
- #39
Practice basis: Published practice evidence. Evidence depth: minimum. These are observed public signals, not a specialization or outcome finding.
Review full office evidence →#9 in this cohort
Runion Personal Injury Lawyers - Phoenix Office
78.7score
- Rating
- 4.9/5
- Analyzed
- 180
- Maps
- #25
Practice basis: Published practice evidence. Evidence depth: moderate. These are observed public signals, not a specialization or outcome finding.
Review full office evidence →#10 in this cohort
Moore Injury Law
78.2score
- Rating
- 5/5
- Analyzed
- 86
- Maps
- #68
Practice basis: Profile + review context. Evidence depth: minimum. These are observed public signals, not a specialization or outcome finding.
Review full office evidence →What this market reveals
Market depth
Evidence beyond the first 20 results
25 qualified offices were observed beyond Maps position 20, while 15 were observed within the first 20. Discovery visibility and review evidence can tell different stories.
Hidden leaders
13 offices meet the defined signal
A “hidden leader” appears beyond observed Maps position 20 but has a Review Evidence Score at or above the qualified-market median. It is a research label, not an endorsement.
Lebovitz Law Group: 86.1 score, Maps #36Gallagher & Kennedy Injury Lawyers: 84.7 score, Maps #47Harris Injury Law: 83.8 score, Maps #28Review concentration
Top five hold 6.6%
The five most-reviewed qualified offices account for 6.6% of tracked reviews. The review-volume HHI is 742.7, a descriptive concentration measure rather than a quality score.
How practice and review evidence differ
For car-accident comparisons, the practice-evidence gate connects each included profile to public practice language or enough context-classified review evidence. This supports comparison within the listed market using a consistent evidence threshold. It does not prove specialization, qualifications, case experience, expected outcomes, or suitability for an individual situation.
The practice gate decides whether an office belongs in this comparison. The Review Evidence Score then compares public-rating, depth, recommendation, communication, public owner-response, consistency, and low-concern signals. Neither step evaluates legal skill or likely results.
Maps visibility stays separate
“Best observed position” is the strongest discovery position captured across the fixed query collection. Multiple offices can show the same value when observations came from different queries or backfills. It is never a score input.
Read the complete methodology →Complete published cohort
All 40 qualified offices
| Rank | Office | Score | Rating | Tracked | Analyzed | Evidence | Maps |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| #1 | Torgenson Law | 88.4 | 5 | 720 | 636 | strong | #4 |
| #2 | Lebovitz Law Group | 86.1 | 5 | 182 | 160 | moderate | #36 |
| #3 | Gallagher & Kennedy Injury Lawyers | 84.7 | 4.9 | 148 | 143 | moderate | #47 |
| #4 | Kelly Law Team Phoenix | 84.1 | 5 | 334 | 319 | strong | #1 |
| #5 | Harris Injury Law | 83.8 | 4.9 | 130 | 106 | moderate | #28 |
| #6 | Hirsch & Lyon | 79.9 | 4.9 | 335 | 294 | strong | #26 |
| #7 | Shapiro Law Team | 79.8 | 5 | 875 | 789 | strong | #30 |
| #8 | Wyatt Injury Law Personal Injury Lawyers | 79.1 | 5 | 98 | 91 | minimum | #39 |
| #9 | Runion Personal Injury Lawyers - Phoenix Office | 78.7 | 4.9 | 197 | 180 | moderate | #25 |
| #10 | Moore Injury Law | 78.2 | 5 | 92 | 86 | minimum | #68 |
| #11 | Sargon Law Group | 77.9 | 4.9 | 422 | 385 | strong | #32 |
| #12 | CLS Law | 75.1 | 4.8 | 122 | 97 | minimum | #19 |
| #13 | Rack Law Accident Lawyers Phoenix | 74.3 | 4.9 | 531 | 461 | strong | #29 |
| #14 | The Lowrider Lawyers - Truck Crash & Injury Attorneys | 73.5 | 5 | 141 | 127 | moderate | #6 |
| #15 | Hutzler Law Personal Injury & Car Accident Lawyer Phoenix | 73.5 | 4.9 | 150 | 107 | moderate | #15 |
| #16 | Blake Law Firm | 73.4 | 4.9 | 359 | 282 | strong | #46 |
| #17 | The Law Offices Of Alcock & Associates P.C. | 73.1 | 4.9 | 3,571 | 2,594 | extensive | #16 |
| #18 | Lloyd Baker Injury Attorneys | 71.7 | 4.9 | 849 | 504 | strong | #18 |
| #19 | Solorzano Law Firm | 71.7 | 5 | 838 | 496 | strong | #34 |
| #20 | Kamper & Estrada, PLLC | 70.4 | 5 | 200 | 147 | moderate | #50 |
| #21 | Phoenix Car Accident Lawyer Matt Hartley | 70.2 | 5 | 210 | 122 | moderate | #7 |
| #22 | Big Chad Law Injury & Accident Lawyers | 69.6 | 4.9 | 622 | 422 | strong | #13 |
| #23 | Abogado Más Chingón | 69.6 | 4.9 | 173 | 110 | moderate | #37 |
| #24 | Sotelo Law Group | 69.4 | 4.8 | 79 | 71 | minimum | #43 |
| #25 | Gage Mathers Law Group | 69.2 | 4.7 | 92 | 90 | minimum | #45 |
| #26 | Big Auto Accident Attorneys | 68 | 4.9 | 669 | 589 | strong | #8 |
| #27 | Feller & Wendt, LLC | 67.9 | 4.8 | 123 | 83 | minimum | #3 |
| #28 | Lamber Goodnow Injury Lawyers | 67.5 | 4.9 | 734 | 552 | strong | #27 |
| #29 | Lerner and Rowe Injury Attorneys | 67.4 | 4.7 | 1,005 | 811 | strong | #42 |
| #30 | Esquire Law | 67.2 | 4.8 | 552 | 364 | strong | #40 |
| #31 | The Husband & Wife Law Team | 67 | 4.7 | 272 | 231 | moderate | #33 |
| #32 | Car Accident Lawyer Pros Phoenix | 66.9 | 4.9 | 266 | 74 | minimum | #9 |
| #33 | Phillips Law Group - Injury Lawyers | 66.6 | 4.8 | 2,511 | 2,143 | extensive | #17 |
| #34 | National Injury Attorneys, LLC | 65.9 | 5 | 602 | 413 | strong | #21 |
| #35 | AZ Hometown Law Firm | 65.9 | 4.8 | 260 | 180 | moderate | #31 |
| #36 | Law Offices of Samuel P. Moeller, PLLC | 61.5 | 4.5 | 104 | 90 | minimum | #38 |
| #37 | McCormick Law, Car Wreck Attorneys PLLC | 60 | 4.8 | 471 | 373 | strong | #11 |
| #38 | TopDog Law Personal Injury Lawyers | 59.8 | 4.7 | 270 | 158 | moderate | #23 |
| #39 | Valley Injury Lawyers | 53.9 | 4.4 | 60 | 59 | minimum | #20 |
| #40 | Rafi Law Group | 52.6 | 4.6 | 3,531 | 2,879 | extensive | #41 |
Questions about this comparison
Which Phoenix car accident firms lead this review-evidence comparison?
Torgenson Law (88.4/100), Lebovitz Law Group (86.1/100), Gallagher & Kennedy Injury Lawyers (84.7/100) have the three highest Review Evidence Scores among 40 qualified offices in Law Leaderboard’s fixed Phoenix car accident cohort. The score compares public-review evidence; it does not measure legal ability, credentials, outcomes, or fit.
How many Phoenix offices qualified for this comparison?
40 of 50 discovered office profiles passed both the review-evidence and practice-signal gates. Law Leaderboard requires at least 8 qualified offices before publishing a market page.
Does Google Maps position affect the Law Leaderboard score?
No. Maps visibility is reported as a separate discovery observation and never enters the Review Evidence Score.
Does appearing here prove that a firm specializes in car accident matters?
No. Practice inclusion requires explicit public-profile language or sufficient context-classified review evidence. It is not a credential, specialization certification, endorsement, or outcome claim.
Sources, freshness, and limitations
Source research release llb-depth50-research-2026-08-11-r1 was materialized 2026-08-12T08:00:43Z. Practice classification uses practice-signal-v1.0.0; scoring uses review-evidence-v1.0.0. The public consumer release was published 2026-08-12.
- The fixed discovery cohort is not a census of every law office in the market.
- Google Maps discovery positions are captured observations, may repeat across queries, and are not scoring inputs.
- Public reviews are incomplete, can change, and do not establish legal skill or predict a case outcome.
- Practice evidence reflects explicit public-profile language or classified review context; it is not a credential or specialization finding.
More Car Accident markets
Atlanta, GA 40 qualifiedAustin, TX 24 qualifiedBaltimore, MD 28 qualifiedCharlotte, NC 32 qualifiedChicago, IL 39 qualifiedDallas, TX 34 qualifiedDenver, CO 33 qualifiedHouston, TX 41 qualifiedJacksonville, FL 29 qualifiedLas Vegas, NV 38 qualifiedLos Angeles, CA 30 qualifiedMiami, FL 30 qualified
View every published car accident market →