Morgan & Morgan Reviews, Ratings & Complaints

Brand aliases: Morgan and Morgan

506 2nd Ave Suite 1513, Seattle, WA 98104

Public profile and review data last refreshed Aug 2, 2026.

4.7
886 Google reviews
Claimed Google Business Profile Compare all tracked Morgan & Morgan locations

Morgan & Morgan is a personal injury attorney in Seattle, Washington with a 4.7-star rating across 886 tracked Google reviews. The current build retrieved 516 reviews for this profile and analyzed 267 text reviews. The firm has an owner reply on 98% of retrieved reviews, 8% of analyzed reviewers explicitly recommend it, and communication is mentioned in 4% of analyzed reviews. Its review pattern is fairly consistent based on a consistency index of 70.8.

The most common review themes are professionalism (18%), speed (10%), and explicit recommendation (8%). Use these signals as due-diligence inputs rather than proof of specialty or likely outcome.

Review verdict

Morgan & Morgan 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 professionalism (18%), speed (10%), and explicit recommendation (8%). These percentages describe text labels in the captured sample, not independently verified service claims.

Is Morgan & Morgan legitimate?

Law Leaderboard can confirm that this page represents a public Google Business listing for Morgan & Morgan at 506 2nd Ave Suite 1513, Seattle, WA 98104. The listing has 886 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 Morgan & Morgan a good law firm?

Morgan & Morgan has a 4.7/5 public Google rating across 886 tracked reviews. Law Leaderboard retrieved 516 reviews and analyzed 267 review texts for this profile. In that sample, the firm has an owner reply on 98% of retrieved reviews, 8% of analyzed reviewers explicitly recommend it, and communication is mentioned in 4% of analyzed reviews. These are public feedback signals, not a legal endorsement or prediction of case results.

What do Morgan & Morgan reviews complain about?

The recurring concern labels found in the analyzed negative-review sample are unprofessional (16%) and poor communication (7%). Percentages describe the relevant review sample and should be read with the rating distribution and coverage notes below.

Does Morgan & Morgan respond to reviews?

Public review data shows an owner reply on 98% of the reviews retrieved for Morgan & Morgan. This measures responses to public reviews, not communication with clients during a case. Communication appears in 4% of analyzed review texts.

Could experiences vary by location?

Yes. This evidence covers the Seattle, Washington office. Compare all tracked Morgan & Morgan offices before generalizing this location's rating, praise, or concern signals to the wider brand.

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 Score54.8/100Strong evidence; public-review evidence only.
Within-market score percentile3.8th percentileCompared with the fixed Seattle, WA cohort.
Tracked Google reviews886Public review count currently visible on the profile.
Reviews retrieved516Review records stored in the current build.
Text reviews analyzed267Review texts used for NLP-derived praise, complaint, and communication metrics.
Owner response rate98%Share of retrieved reviews with an owner reply.
Explicit recommendation rate8%Share of analyzed reviewers who explicitly recommend the firm.
Communication mentions4%Share of analyzed reviews that mention communication.
Consistency index70.8Higher scores indicate a more consistently positive rating pattern.

Identity-linked office intelligence

Where This Office Sits in Seattle, WA

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

54.8/100

Score percentile

3.8th percentile

Rating percentile

15.4th percentile

Review-count percentile

96.2th percentile

Owner-reply percentile

Not scored

Evidence strength and entity relationship

Strong evidence from 267 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-9e5396fd72dedaef
Law Leaderboard brand ID
llb-brand-morgan-and-morgan

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

1.1%

3 matches: 2 positive, 1 negative. Precision in external QA: 96%.

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

Aug 17, 2021

Latest dated review

Apr 1, 2026

Retrieved coverage

58%

516 retrieved of 886 tracked

Recent 12-month reviews

147

Average rating: 4.63/5

Year-over-year review change

Average rating

+0.03 stars

4.63/5 in the recent period vs. 4.60/5 in the prior period

Review activity

-9 reviews

147 recent reviews vs. 156 in the prior period

Owner replies by rating group

Replies to 1–3-star reviews

94%

43 replies across 46 retrieved low-star reviews

Replies to 4–5-star reviews

97%

458 replies across 470 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.

Quick Stats

Reviews/Month
4.8
Avg Review Length
142 chars
Local Guide %
35%

Practice Areas

Business attorneyEmployment attorneyLaw firm

About

As America's Largest Injury Law Firm, we believe you deserve to have the best life, so our goal is to fight to get you the best results. For over 35 years, Morgan & Morgan has been fighting for the pe...

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 267 text reviews in the current build.

Owner Response Rate
98%
replies to reviews
Explicit Recommendation Rate
8%
of analyzed reviewers
Communication Mentions
4%
of analyzed reviews
Professionalism Mentions
18%
of analyzed reviews
Results Mentions
6%
of analyzed reviews
Compassion Mentions
2%
of analyzed reviews
Average response time: 126.3 days

Rating Distribution

5 star
725 (82%)
4 star
89 (10%)
3 star
36 (4.1%)
2 star
6 (<1%)
1 star
30 (3.4%)
88% positive reviews 9% negative reviews Consistency index: 70.8

What Clients Praise

professionalism 17.6% of reviews
speed 9.7% of reviews
explicit recommendation 7.9% of reviews
case results 6% of reviews
communication 3.7% of reviews

Common Concerns (from negative reviews)

unprofessional (16.1%)
poor communication (6.5%)

Other Personal Injury in Seattle

Sources, Freshness & Limitations

Sources

  • Google Business profile data for the firm, including address, phone, website, business attributes, and aggregate public rating.
  • 516 retrieved reviews and 267 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 14:07:53.
  • Review records last collected: 2026-04-06 17:00:09; derived metrics last analyzed: 2026-08-02 20:36:25.
  • 886 total Google reviews tracked; 516 reviews retrieved; 267 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: 58% 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 Seattle personal injury lawyers ranked by public review signals
Explore Washington personal injury markets → Report an outdated or incorrect detail on this profile →