304 S Plant Ave, Tampa, FL 33606
Public profile and review data last refreshed Aug 2, 2026.
MattLaw Car Accident and Personal Injury Lawyers is a personal injury attorney in Tampa, Florida with a 5.0-star rating across 1,234 tracked Google reviews. The current build retrieved 1,203 reviews for this profile and analyzed 971 text reviews. The firm has an owner reply on 96% of retrieved reviews, 19% of analyzed reviewers explicitly recommend it, and communication is mentioned in 2% of analyzed reviews. Its review pattern is highly consistent based on a consistency index of 97.3.
The most common review themes are explicit recommendation (19%), case results (7%), and professionalism (6%). 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
These direct answers separate what the public review dataset can confirm from licensing, disciplinary, and case-fit questions that require independent verification.
The strongest recurring praise signals in the analyzed review sample are explicit recommendation (19%), case results (7%), and professionalism (6%). These percentages describe text labels in the captured sample, not independently verified service claims.
Law Leaderboard can confirm that this page represents a public Google Business listing for MattLaw Car Accident and Personal Injury Lawyers at 304 S Plant Ave, Tampa, FL 33606. The listing has 1,234 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.
MattLaw Car Accident and Personal Injury Lawyers has a 5.0/5 public Google rating across 1,234 tracked reviews. Law Leaderboard retrieved 1,203 reviews and analyzed 971 review texts for this profile. In that sample, the firm has an owner reply on 96% of retrieved reviews, 19% of analyzed reviewers explicitly recommend it, and communication is mentioned in 2% of analyzed reviews. These are public feedback signals, not a legal endorsement or prediction of case results.
The recurring concern labels found in the analyzed negative-review sample are unprofessional (27%). Percentages describe the relevant review sample and should be read with the rating distribution and coverage notes below.
Public review data shows an owner reply on 96% of the reviews retrieved for MattLaw Car Accident and Personal Injury Lawyers. This measures responses to public reviews, not communication with clients during a case. Communication appears in 2% of analyzed review texts.
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.
| Metric | Value | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| Review Evidence Score | 68/100 | Strong evidence; public-review evidence only. |
| Within-market score percentile | 31th percentile | Compared with the fixed Tampa, FL cohort. |
| Tracked Google reviews | 1,234 | Public review count currently visible on the profile. |
| Reviews retrieved | 1,203 | Review records stored in the current build. |
| Text reviews analyzed | 971 | Review texts used for NLP-derived praise, complaint, and communication metrics. |
| Owner response rate | 96% | Share of retrieved reviews with an owner reply. |
| Explicit recommendation rate | 19% | Share of analyzed reviewers who explicitly recommend the firm. |
| Communication mentions | 2% | Share of analyzed reviews that mention communication. |
| Consistency index | 97.3 | Higher scores indicate a more consistently positive rating pattern. |
Identity-linked office intelligence
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.
Evidence score
68/100
Score percentile
31th percentile
Rating percentile
100th percentile
Review-count percentile
95.2th percentile
Owner-reply percentile
Not scored
Strong evidence from 971 analyzed review texts. The identity match uses exact source IDs in the private graph; those provider IDs are not exposed here.
The nearest scored offices in the same fixed market by Review Evidence Score. Proximity is descriptive, not a recommendation.
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.
1.1%
11 matches: 9 positive, 0 negative, 2 neutral. Precision in external QA: 82%.
0.6%
6 matches: 6 positive, 0 negative. Precision in external QA: 96%.
0.3%
3 matches: 3 positive, 0 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
Public-review aggregates captured through Apr 6, 2026. These figures describe the retrieved history, not a live feed.
Retrieved history begins
Sep 4, 2014
Latest dated review
Mar 28, 2026
Retrieved coverage
98%
1,203 retrieved of 1,234 tracked
Recent 12-month reviews
204
Average rating: 4.96/5
Average rating
-0.03 stars
4.96/5 in the recent period vs. 4.99/5 in the prior period
Review activity
-20 reviews
204 recent reviews vs. 224 in the prior period
Replies to 1–3-star reviews
92%
12 replies across 13 retrieved low-star reviews
Replies to 4–5-star reviews
97%
1,151 replies across 1,190 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.
Welcome to MattLaw®, Your Tampa Personal Injury Lawyers. MattLaw® is a team of Tampa Personal Injury Lawyers led by Matt Powell, who has protected thousands of injured victims and their families for o...
Details are shown only when captured from qualifying pages on the firm’s own website; they are self-reported website statements captured at a point in time and are not independent verification of service quality, attorney licensing, or suitability for a specific case.
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.
Based on analysis of 971 text reviews in the current build.
Q: Do you offer free case evaluations?
A: Yes, we do! Learn your rights by filling out our Free Case Evaluation form.
— MattLaw Car Accident and Personal Injury Lawyers
Q: How can MattLaw help with my personal injury claim in Tampa, Florida?
A: MattLaw assists with personal injury claims by conducting investigations, gathering evidence, negotiating with insurance companies, and representing clients in court. Our goal is to protect your rights and obtain the compensation you deserve for your injuries in Tampa, Florida.
— MattLaw Car Accident and Personal Injury Lawyers
Q: What cases does MattLaw handle in Tampa, Florida?
A: MattLaw specializes in personal injury cases, including car accidents, slip and falls, medical malpractice, workplace injuries, product liability, and wrongful death in Tampa, Florida. Our experienced attorneys provide dedicated legal representation to seek fair compensation for your injuries.
— MattLaw Car Accident and Personal Injury Lawyers
Q: Should I have my own attorney n ey when selling.my house I won the 1st toxic.mold case in ma in 2003 proved it made me sick precedent setting
A: Yes, you should have your own attorney in any transactional matter. Otherwise you may regret it later. Congratulations on winning the toxic mold case. I hope you are well. Matt
— Matt Powell
Q: Hello Matt this is Emil Chaveriat Our home was vandelized they got off with over $19,000 when they are arrested can I sue their parents civilly?
A: Yes, you can sue the parents, however, there is a case that says a parent may not be held responsible unless you can show the parent knew the child's behavior was likely or predictable.
— Matt Powell