Claimed Google Business Profile Data refreshed Aug 2, 2026

Hach & Rose, LLP Reviews, Ratings & Complaints

112 Madison Ave 10th floor, New York, NY 10016

4.8 · 264 Google reviews

Review evidence score

LAW LEADERBOARD · REVIEW EVIDENCE SCORE · FIXED COHORT · 77.5 / 100
Within-market percentile
78.6th percentile
Evidence depth
Moderate evidence

Compares public-review evidence only. Not a measure of legal ability or outcomes.

Hach & Rose, LLP is a personal injury attorney in New York, New York with a 4.8-star rating across 264 tracked Google reviews. The current build retrieved 264 reviews for this profile and analyzed 224 text reviews. The firm has an owner reply on 95% of retrieved reviews, 82% of analyzed reviewers explicitly recommend it, and communication is mentioned in 25% of analyzed reviews. Its review pattern is fairly consistent based on a consistency index of 88.8.

The most common review themes are explicit recommendation (82%), professionalism (38%), and case results (28%). Reviews in the sample mention matters involving car accident, motorcycle, slip and fall, and medical malpractice. Use these signals as due-diligence inputs rather than proof of specialty or likely outcome.

Review verdict

Hach & Rose, LLP review summary, answered from data.

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

Hach & Rose, LLP reviews most often praise explicit recommendation (82%), professionalism (38%), and case results (28%) in the analyzed sample. These percentages describe text labels in the captured sample, not independently verified service claims.

Is Hach & Rose, LLP legitimate?

Hach & Rose, LLP is listed on Google as a public business profile at 112 Madison Ave 10th floor, New York, NY 10016, with 264 tracked Google reviews, and the listing is marked as claimed on Google. A public listing 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 Hach & Rose, LLP a good law firm?

Hach & Rose, LLP has a 4.8/5 public Google rating across 264 tracked reviews. Law Leaderboard retrieved 264 reviews and analyzed 224 review texts for this profile. In that sample, the firm has an owner reply on 95% of retrieved reviews, 82% of analyzed reviewers explicitly recommend it, and communication is mentioned in 25% of analyzed reviews. These are public feedback signals, not a legal endorsement or prediction of case results.

What do Hach & Rose, LLP reviews complain about?

Hach & Rose, LLP reviews in the analyzed negative sample carry the recurring concern labels unprofessional (50%). Percentages describe the relevant review sample and should be read with the rating distribution and coverage notes below.

Does Hach & Rose, LLP respond to reviews?

Hach & Rose, LLP has replied to 95% of the reviews retrieved for this profile, according to public review data. This measures responses to public reviews, not communication with clients during a case. Communication appears in 25% 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
Review Evidence Score77.5/100Moderate evidence; public-review evidence only.
Within-market score percentile78.6th percentileCompared with the fixed New York, NY cohort.
Tracked Google reviews264Public review count currently visible on the profile.
Reviews retrieved264Review records stored in the current build.
Text reviews analyzed224Review texts used for NLP-derived praise, complaint, and communication metrics.
Owner response rate95%Share of retrieved reviews with an owner reply.
Explicit recommendation rate82%Share of analyzed reviewers who explicitly recommend the firm.
Communication mentions25%Share of analyzed reviews that mention communication.
Professionalism mentions38%Share of analyzed reviews that mention professionalism.
Case-results mentions28%Share of analyzed reviews that mention case results.
Compassion mentions14%Share of analyzed reviews that mention compassion or care.
Consistency index88.8Higher scores indicate a more consistently positive rating pattern.
Average owner response time151.6 daysMean delay between a public review and the owner reply.

Identity-linked office intelligence

Where This Office Sits in New York, NY

An office’s within-market percentile shows how its Review Evidence Score compares with the other profiles in that market. It is a relative position, not a probability, quality rating, or prediction. The score and percentile reflect public-review evidence only—not legal skill, licensing, case outcomes, misconduct, or suitability.

Compare offices side by side →

Evidence score

77.5/100

Score percentile

78.6th percentile

Rating percentile

14.3th percentile

Review-count percentile

54.8th percentile

Owner-reply percentile

78.6th percentile

Evidence strength and entity relationship

Moderate evidence from 224 analyzed review texts. The identity match uses exact source IDs in the private graph; those provider IDs are not exposed here.

Law Leaderboard office ID
llb-office-32f66a084ea3ec61
Law Leaderboard brand ID
llb-brand-11cf66559c87ea40
Brand relationship
Hach & Rose, LLP

QA-published themes for this office

The published themes are communication, responsiveness or delays, and outcome language. Theme prevalence is calculated only for offices whose theme result passed minimum sample, confidence, and external precision gates. Outcome language reflects an unverified claim in a review; it is not independent confirmation of what happened.

communication

8.0%

18 matches: 17 positive, 1 negative. Precision in external QA: 96%.

Outcome language (unverified)

5.8%

13 matches: 9 positive, 1 negative, 3 neutral. Precision in external QA: 82%.

responsiveness delays

2.7%

6 matches: 4 positive, 2 negative. Precision in external QA: 95%.

Release llb-consumer-intelligence-2026-08-12-r4. Trend fields remain withheld until the separate multi-snapshot publication gate is met.

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

Mar 13, 2014

Latest dated review

Mar 30, 2026

Retrieved coverage

100%

264 retrieved of 264 tracked

Recent 12-month reviews

47

Average rating: 4.83/5

Year-over-year review change

Average rating

-0.07 stars

4.83/5 in the recent period vs. 4.90/5 in the prior period

Review activity

+17 reviews

47 recent reviews vs. 30 in the prior period

Owner replies by rating group

Replies to 1–3-star reviews

54%

7 replies across 13 retrieved low-star reviews

Replies to 4–5-star reviews

98%

246 replies across 251 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 accidentmotorcycleslip and fallmedical malpracticeworkplace injurywrongful death

Quick Stats

Reviews/Month
1.5
Avg Review Length
340 chars
Local Guide %
22%

Practice Areas

Employment 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.

Rating Distribution

5 star
246 (93%)
4 star
5 (1.9%)
3 star
2 (<1%)
2 star
2 (<1%)
1 star
9 (3.4%)
95% positive reviews 5% negative reviews Consistency index: 88.8

What Clients Praise

explicit recommendation 82.1% of reviews
professionalism 37.5% of reviews
case results 27.7% of reviews
communication 24.6% of reviews
compassion and care 13.8% of reviews

Common Concerns (from negative reviews)

● unprofessional (50%)

Other Personal Injury in New York

Provenance

Sources, freshness, and limitations.

Sources

  • • Google Business profile data for the firm, including address, phone, website, business attributes, and aggregate public rating.
  • • 264 retrieved reviews and 224 text reviews used to calculate praise, complaint, communication, and response metrics for this profile.
  • • Consumer intelligence release llb-consumer-intelligence-2026-08-12-r4, derived from llb-depth50-research-2026-08-11-r1, supplies immutable office and brand IDs, market context, evidence-strength tier, and published practice/city memberships.
  • • 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 11:51:29.
  • • Review records last collected: 2026-04-06 17:02:35; derived metrics last analyzed: 2026-08-02 20:36:21.
  • • 264 total Google reviews tracked; 264 reviews retrieved; 224 text reviews analyzed.
  • • Consumer intelligence release published 2026-08-12; that is a derived-release date, not a new profile or review observation.
  • • Review-history snapshot: Apr 6, 2026; retrieved coverage: 100% 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.
  • • A within-market percentile is a relative position inside the fixed market cohort. It is not a probability, national rank, or legal-performance grade.
  • • A theme appears only when that office result passes the published minimum sample, confidence, and external precision gates; absence is not proof that the topic never appears.
  • • This page helps you evaluate a firm’s public client-feedback footprint, but hiring decisions still require direct due diligence.
← View all New York personal injury lawyers ranked by public review signals
Explore New York personal injury markets → Report an outdated or incorrect detail on this profile →