Edward M. Bernstein & Associates Reviews, Ratings & Complaints

10801 W Charleston Blvd #520, Las Vegas, NV 89135

4.5
436 Google reviews
Claimed Google Business Profile

Edward M. Bernstein & Associates is a personal injury attorney in Las Vegas, Nevada with a 4.5-star rating across 436 tracked Google reviews. The current build retrieved 438 reviews for this profile and analyzed 286 text reviews. The firm has an owner reply on 50% of retrieved reviews, 34% of analyzed reviewers explicitly recommend it, and communication is mentioned in 15% of analyzed reviews. Its review pattern is fairly consistent based on a consistency index of 70.6.

The most common review themes are explicit recommendation (34%), case results (22%), and professionalism (20%). Reviews in the sample mention matters involving car accident, motorcycle, medical malpractice, and workplace injury. Use these signals as due-diligence inputs rather than proof of specialty or likely outcome.

Review verdict

Edward M. Bernstein & Associates Review Summary and Due-Diligence Questions

These direct answers separate what the public review dataset can confirm from licensing, disciplinary, and case-fit questions that require independent verification.

What clients praise

The strongest recurring praise signals in the analyzed review sample are explicit recommendation (34%), case results (22%), and professionalism (20%). These percentages describe text labels in the captured sample, not independently verified service claims.

Is Edward M. Bernstein & Associates legitimate?

Law Leaderboard can confirm that this page represents a public Google Business listing for Edward M. Bernstein & Associates at 10801 W Charleston Blvd #520, Las Vegas, NV 89135. The listing has 436 tracked Google reviews and is marked as claimed on Google. This does not independently verify attorney licensing, disciplinary history, insurance, or eligibility to handle a specific matter; check the relevant state bar and speak with the firm before hiring.

Is Edward M. Bernstein & Associates a good law firm?

Edward M. Bernstein & Associates has a 4.5/5 public Google rating across 436 tracked reviews. Law Leaderboard retrieved 438 reviews and analyzed 286 review texts for this profile. In that sample, the firm has an owner reply on 50% of retrieved reviews, 34% of analyzed reviewers explicitly recommend it, and communication is mentioned in 15% of analyzed reviews. These are public feedback signals, not a legal endorsement or prediction of case results.

What do Edward M. Bernstein & Associates reviews complain about?

The recurring concern labels found in the analyzed negative-review sample are unprofessional (24%), poor communication (5%), and passed around (5%). Percentages describe the relevant review sample and should be read with the rating distribution and coverage notes below.

Does Edward M. Bernstein & Associates respond to reviews?

Public review data shows an owner reply on 50% of the reviews retrieved for Edward M. Bernstein & Associates. This measures responses to public reviews, not communication with clients during a case. Communication appears in 15% of analyzed review texts.

Firm Snapshot Table

Use this table to see the difference between the firm's public review footprint, the reviews retrieved into the current build, and the text reviews that feed the NLP metrics on this page.

MetricValueWhat it means
Tracked Google reviews436Public review count currently visible on the profile.
Reviews retrieved438Review records stored in the current build.
Text reviews analyzed286Review texts used for NLP-derived praise, complaint, and communication metrics.
Owner response rate50%Share of retrieved reviews with an owner reply.
Explicit recommendation rate34%Share of analyzed reviewers who explicitly recommend the firm.
Communication mentions15%Share of analyzed reviews that mention communication.
Consistency index70.6Higher scores indicate a more consistently positive rating pattern.

Historical review data

Review Activity and Response Detail

Public-review aggregates captured through Apr 6, 2026. These figures describe the retrieved history, not a live feed.

Method: review-trends-v1.0.0

Retrieved history begins

Jun 5, 2012

Latest dated review

Apr 6, 2026

Retrieved coverage

1%

438 retrieved of 436 tracked

Recent 12-month reviews

166

Average rating: 4.83/5

Year-over-year review change

Average rating

+0.40 stars

4.83/5 in the recent period vs. 4.43/5 in the prior period

Review activity

+152 reviews

166 recent reviews vs. 14 in the prior period

Owner replies by rating group

Replies to 1–3-star reviews

29%

15 replies across 51 retrieved low-star reviews

Replies to 4–5-star reviews

60%

233 replies across 387 retrieved high-star reviews

Comparison gates prevent thin or incomplete review history from being presented as a trend. Review text and reviewer identities are not published in these aggregates.

Case Types Mentioned in Reviews

car accidentmotorcyclemedical malpracticeworkplace injury

Quick Stats

Reviews/Month
1.7
Avg Review Length
244 chars
Local Guide %
23%

Practice Areas

Civil law attorneyLaw firmAttorneyLegal servicesTrial attorney

What Our Data Shows

The sections below break this firm into measurable signals: responsiveness, communication mentions, review consistency, praised attributes, complaint themes, historical activity, and source-freshness notes. Read them together, not as isolated stats.

Performance Metrics

Based on analysis of 286 text reviews in the current build.

Owner Response Rate
50%
replies to reviews
Explicit Recommendation Rate
34%
of analyzed reviewers
Communication Mentions
15%
of analyzed reviews
Professionalism Mentions
20%
of analyzed reviews
Results Mentions
22%
of analyzed reviews
Compassion Mentions
3%
of analyzed reviews
Average response time: 117.8 days

Rating Distribution

5 star
361 (83%)
4 star
24 (5.5%)
3 star
5 (1.1%)
2 star
6 (1.4%)
1 star
40 (9.2%)
87% positive reviews 13% negative reviews Consistency index: 70.6

What Clients Praise

explicit recommendation 33.9% of reviews
case results 22% of reviews
professionalism 20.3% of reviews
communication 14.7% of reviews
speed 11.9% of reviews

Common Concerns (from negative reviews)

unprofessional (24.3%)
poor communication (5.4%)
passed around (5.4%)

Other Personal Injury in Las Vegas

Sources, Freshness & Limitations

Sources

  • Google Business profile data for the firm, including address, phone, website, business attributes, and aggregate public rating.
  • 438 retrieved reviews and 286 text reviews used to calculate praise, complaint, communication, and response metrics for this profile.
  • Historical review aggregates calculated from the retrieved public-review history captured through Apr 6, 2026.
  • Aggregate business and review-analysis fields rendered from the same exported firm record used by the city rankings; reviewer identities and review text are not republished.

Freshness

  • Business profile last collected: 2026-04-02 11:42:38.
  • Review records last collected: 2026-04-06 17:01:17; derived metrics last analyzed: 2026-08-02 20:36:21.
  • 436 total Google reviews tracked; 438 reviews retrieved; 286 text reviews analyzed.
  • Review-history snapshot: Apr 6, 2026; retrieved coverage: 1% of the tracked-review total.
  • Methodology version: 2026.04.07. Build packaging timestamp: 2026-08-03 08:34:48 UTC; this is not a source-refresh date.

Limitations

  • Public review volume, retrieved review records, and text reviews analyzed are different counts and should not be treated as interchangeable.
  • Historical comparison tiles appear only when retrieved review history reaches both full twelve-month windows and each window meets the rating-count threshold.
  • Review-derived case-type and praise signals show what appears in the sample; they do not independently verify board certification or case outcomes.
  • This page helps you evaluate a firm’s public client-feedback footprint, but hiring decisions still require direct due diligence.
← View all Las Vegas personal injury lawyers ranked by public review signals
Explore Nevada personal injury markets → Report an outdated or incorrect detail on this profile →