Claimed Google Business Profile Data refreshed Aug 12, 2026

Tippens and Zurosky Reviews, Ratings & Complaints

1120 Pearl Park Wy Ste 400, Charlotte, NC 28204

4.5 · 316 Google reviews

Review evidence score

LAW LEADERBOARD · REVIEW EVIDENCE SCORE · FIXED COHORT · 54.8 / 100
Within-market percentile
8.1th percentile
Evidence depth
Moderate evidence

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

Tippens and Zurosky is a personal injury attorney in Charlotte, North Carolina with a 4.5-star rating across 316 tracked Google reviews. The current build retrieved 316 reviews for this profile and analyzed 209 text reviews. The firm has an owner reply on 83% of retrieved reviews, 42% of analyzed reviewers explicitly recommend it, and communication is mentioned in 18% of analyzed reviews. Its review pattern is mixed based on a consistency index of 63.6.

The most common review themes are explicit recommendation (42%), professionalism (29%), and communication (18%). Reviews in the sample mention matters involving car accident, medical malpractice, workplace injury, and wrongful death. Use these signals as due-diligence inputs rather than proof of specialty or likely outcome.

Review verdict

Tippens and Zurosky 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

Tippens and Zurosky reviews most often praise explicit recommendation (42%), professionalism (29%), and communication (18%) in the analyzed sample. These percentages describe text labels in the captured sample, not independently verified service claims.

Is Tippens and Zurosky legitimate?

Tippens and Zurosky is listed on Google as a public business profile at 1120 Pearl Park Wy Ste 400, Charlotte, NC 28204, with 316 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 Tippens and Zurosky a good law firm?

Tippens and Zurosky has a 4.5/5 public Google rating across 316 tracked reviews. Law Leaderboard retrieved 316 reviews and analyzed 209 review texts for this profile. In that sample, the firm has an owner reply on 83% of retrieved reviews, 42% of analyzed reviewers explicitly recommend it, and communication is mentioned in 18% of analyzed reviews. These are public feedback signals, not a legal endorsement or prediction of case results.

What do Tippens and Zurosky reviews complain about?

Tippens and Zurosky reviews in the analyzed negative sample carry the recurring concern labels unprofessional (32%), poor communication (8%), and slow process (3%). Percentages describe the relevant review sample and should be read with the rating distribution and coverage notes below.

Does Tippens and Zurosky respond to reviews?

Tippens and Zurosky has replied to 83% 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 18% 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 Score54.8/100Moderate evidence; public-review evidence only.
Within-market score percentile8.1th percentileCompared with the fixed Charlotte, NC cohort.
Tracked Google reviews316Public review count currently visible on the profile.
Reviews retrieved316Review records stored in the current build.
Text reviews analyzed209Review texts used for NLP-derived praise, complaint, and communication metrics.
Owner response rate83%Share of retrieved reviews with an owner reply.
Explicit recommendation rate42%Share of analyzed reviewers who explicitly recommend the firm.
Communication mentions18%Share of analyzed reviews that mention communication.
Professionalism mentions29%Share of analyzed reviews that mention professionalism.
Case-results mentions14%Share of analyzed reviews that mention case results.
Compassion mentions3%Share of analyzed reviews that mention compassion or care.
Consistency index63.6Higher scores indicate a more consistently positive rating pattern.
Average owner response time132.7 daysMean delay between a public review and the owner reply.

Identity-linked office intelligence

Where This Office Sits in Charlotte, NC

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

8.1th percentile

Rating percentile

8.1th percentile

Review-count percentile

62.2th percentile

Owner-reply percentile

Not scored

Evidence strength and entity relationship

Moderate evidence from 209 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-3b07f9f5a1c12fe9
Law Leaderboard brand ID
llb-brand-a2308d9384c614e1
Brand relationship
Tippens and Zurosky

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.

No office-level theme result passed every current publication gate. This is not evidence that reviewers never mentioned these topics.

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

Case Types Mentioned in Reviews

car accidentmedical malpracticeworkplace injurywrongful death

Quick Stats

Reviews/Month
1.5
Avg Review Length
232 chars
Local Guide %
31%

Practice Areas

Law firmAttorney

About

Tippens & Zurosky Attorneys, L.L.P. practices car accident law, personal injury law, workers’ compensation law, and wrongful death law in North Carolina and South Carolina. Our client base is solely c...

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
264 (84%)
4 star
9 (2.8%)
3 star
3 (<1%)
2 star
3 (<1%)
1 star
37 (12%)
82% positive reviews 17% negative reviews Consistency index: 63.6

What Clients Praise

explicit recommendation 42.1% of reviews
professionalism 28.7% of reviews
communication 17.7% of reviews
case results 13.9% of reviews
expertise 7.7% of reviews

Common Concerns (from negative reviews)

● unprofessional (31.6%)
● poor communication (7.9%)
● slow process (2.6%)

Other Personal Injury in Charlotte

Provenance

Sources, freshness, and limitations.

Sources

  • • Google Business profile data for the firm, including address, phone, website, business attributes, and aggregate public rating.
  • • 316 retrieved reviews and 209 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.
  • • 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: 2026-08-09 23:44:51Z.
  • • Review records last collected: 2026-08-11 20:30:18Z; derived metrics last analyzed: 2026-08-12 08:09:58.
  • • 316 total Google reviews tracked; 316 reviews retrieved; 209 text reviews analyzed.
  • • Consumer intelligence release published 2026-08-12; that is a derived-release date, not a new profile or review observation.
  • • Methodology version: review-evidence-v1.0.0. Build packaging timestamp: 2026-08-12 00:00:00Z; 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 Charlotte personal injury lawyers ranked by public review signals
Explore North Carolina personal injury markets → Compare this office in the Car Accident cohort → Compare this office in the Workers' Compensation cohort → Report an outdated or incorrect detail on this profile →