Claimed Google Business Profile Data refreshed Aug 2, 2026

The Law Offices of Eric Richman Reviews, Ratings & Complaints

641 Lexington Ave 14th Floor, New York, NY 10022

5 · 184 Google reviews

Review evidence score

LAW LEADERBOARD · REVIEW EVIDENCE SCORE · FIXED COHORT · 83.5 / 100
Within-market percentile
97.6th percentile
Evidence depth
Moderate evidence

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

The Law Offices of Eric Richman is a personal injury attorney in New York, New York with a 5.0-star rating across 184 tracked Google reviews. The current build retrieved 184 reviews for this profile and analyzed 179 text reviews. The firm has an owner reply on 85% of retrieved reviews, 92% of analyzed reviewers explicitly recommend it, and communication is mentioned in 23% of analyzed reviews. Its review pattern is highly consistent based on a consistency index of 98.9.

The most common review themes are explicit recommendation (92%), professionalism (41%), and expertise (24%). Reviews in the sample mention matters involving car accident, slip and fall, medical malpractice, and workplace injury. Use these signals as due-diligence inputs rather than proof of specialty or likely outcome.

Review verdict

The Law Offices of Eric Richman 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

The Law Offices of Eric Richman reviews most often praise explicit recommendation (92%), professionalism (41%), and expertise (24%) in the analyzed sample. These percentages describe text labels in the captured sample, not independently verified service claims.

Is The Law Offices of Eric Richman legitimate?

The Law Offices of Eric Richman is listed on Google as a public business profile at 641 Lexington Ave 14th Floor, New York, NY 10022, with 184 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 The Law Offices of Eric Richman a good law firm?

The Law Offices of Eric Richman has a 5.0/5 public Google rating across 184 tracked reviews. Law Leaderboard retrieved 184 reviews and analyzed 179 review texts for this profile. In that sample, the firm has an owner reply on 85% of retrieved reviews, 92% of analyzed reviewers explicitly recommend it, and communication is mentioned in 23% of analyzed reviews. These are public feedback signals, not a legal endorsement or prediction of case results.

What do The Law Offices of Eric Richman reviews complain about?

The Law Offices of Eric Richman reviews show no recurring complaint category in the current analyzed sample. That does not prove that no client has complained; review coverage is incomplete and changes over time.

Does The Law Offices of Eric Richman respond to reviews?

The Law Offices of Eric Richman has replied to 85% 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 23% 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 Score83.5/100Moderate evidence; public-review evidence only.
Within-market score percentile97.6th percentileCompared with the fixed New York, NY cohort.
Tracked Google reviews184Public review count currently visible on the profile.
Reviews retrieved184Review records stored in the current build.
Text reviews analyzed179Review texts used for NLP-derived praise, complaint, and communication metrics.
Owner response rate85%Share of retrieved reviews with an owner reply.
Explicit recommendation rate92%Share of analyzed reviewers who explicitly recommend the firm.
Communication mentions23%Share of analyzed reviews that mention communication.
Professionalism mentions41%Share of analyzed reviews that mention professionalism.
Case-results mentions14%Share of analyzed reviews that mention case results.
Compassion mentions19%Share of analyzed reviews that mention compassion or care.
Consistency index98.9Higher scores indicate a more consistently positive rating pattern.
Average owner response time150.8 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

83.5/100

Score percentile

97.6th percentile

Rating percentile

92.9th percentile

Review-count percentile

40.5th percentile

Owner-reply percentile

40.5th percentile

Evidence strength and entity relationship

Moderate evidence from 179 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-6486830a7ae83a8a
Law Leaderboard brand ID
llb-brand-c5cdac4349fb05c3
Brand relationship
The Law Offices of Eric Richman

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

5.6%

10 matches: 10 positive, 0 negative. Precision in external QA: 96%.

Outcome language (unverified)

2.2%

4 matches: 3 positive, 0 negative, 1 neutral. Precision in external QA: 82%.

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 2, 2026. These figures describe the retrieved history, not a live feed.

Method: review-trends-v1.0.0

Retrieved history begins

Jan 18, 2013

Latest dated review

Mar 30, 2026

Retrieved coverage

100%

184 retrieved of 184 tracked

Recent 12-month reviews

37

Average rating: 4.89/5

Year-over-year review change

Average rating

-0.11 stars

4.89/5 in the recent period vs. 5.00/5 in the prior period

Review activity

+10 reviews

37 recent reviews vs. 27 in the prior period

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 accidentslip and fallmedical malpracticeworkplace injury

Quick Stats

Reviews/Month
1.1
Avg Review Length
308 chars
Local Guide %
18%

Practice Areas

Law firmAttorney

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
183 (99%)
4 star
0 (0%)
3 star
0 (0%)
2 star
0 (0%)
1 star
1 (<1%)
99% positive reviews 1% negative reviews Consistency index: 98.9

What Clients Praise

explicit recommendation 92.2% of reviews
professionalism 40.8% of reviews
expertise 24% of reviews
communication 22.9% of reviews
compassion and care 19% of reviews

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.
  • • 184 retrieved reviews and 179 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 2, 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: 2026-04-02 11:54:38; derived metrics last analyzed: 2026-08-02 20:36:21.
  • • 184 total Google reviews tracked; 184 reviews retrieved; 179 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 2, 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 →