Direct answer · depth-50 consumer intelligence

Compare Personal Injury law firms in San Francisco, CA

Sally Morin Personal Injury Lawyers (81.1/100), Anderson Franco, Esq. (80.6/100), Coopers LLP | Personal Injury Law Firm (77.4/100) have the three highest Review Evidence Scores among 17 qualified offices in Law Leaderboard’s fixed San Francisco personal injury cohort. The score compares public-review evidence; it does not measure legal ability, credentials, outcomes, or fit.

17qualified offices
1,787review texts analyzed
71median evidence score
34%of discovered offices qualified

Release 2026.08.12-r4 · fixed cohort · published 2026-08-12 · minimum publication gate: 8 qualified offices

Fast comparison

Top five by Review Evidence Score

Open side-by-side comparison →
Top five San Francisco personal injury offices by Review Evidence Score
Rank / officeScoreRatingTracked reviewsTexts analyzedPractice evidenceMaps visibility
#1Sally Morin Personal Injury Lawyers 81.1 4.9 119 118 Profile + review context #4
#2Anderson Franco, Esq. 80.6 5 98 88 Profile + review context #21
#3Coopers LLP | Personal Injury Law Firm 77.4 4.9 58 57 Profile + review context #38
#4Walkup Personal Injury Lawyers 77.1 5 159 129 Profile + review context #39
#5Choulos, Choulos, & Wyle 76.6 4.9 64 63 Profile + review context #22

Maps visibility is shown separately and is never used to calculate the Review Evidence Score.

Leading office profiles

Each profile combines score depth, practice-signal basis, and a separate visibility observation. Read the office page before making a shortlist.

#7 in this cohort

Goodrow Law Office

75.4score
Rating
5/5
Analyzed
98
Maps
#17

Practice basis: Profile + review context. Evidence depth: minimum. These are observed public signals, not a specialization or outcome finding.

Review full office evidence →

#9 in this cohort

Law Brothers

71score
Rating
4.9/5
Analyzed
125
Maps
#27

Practice basis: Profile + review context. Evidence depth: moderate. These are observed public signals, not a specialization or outcome finding.

Review full office evidence →

#10 in this cohort

Arash Law

70.4score
Rating
4.9/5
Analyzed
112
Maps
#13

Practice basis: Explicit public profile. Evidence depth: moderate. These are observed public signals, not a specialization or outcome finding.

Review full office evidence →

What this market reveals

Market depth

Evidence beyond the first 20 results

8 qualified offices were observed beyond Maps position 20, while 9 were observed within the first 20. Discovery visibility and review evidence can tell different stories.

Review concentration

Top five hold 19.8%

The five most-reviewed qualified offices account for 19.8% of tracked reviews. The review-volume HHI is 1155.4, a descriptive concentration measure rather than a quality score.

How practice and review evidence differ

For personal-injury comparisons, the practice-evidence gate requires a public-profile practice signal or sufficient context-classified review evidence alongside the review input gate. That supports like-for-like comparison of available public evidence. It does not establish specialization, credentials, legal ability, likely results, or whether an office fits a particular matter.

The practice gate decides whether an office belongs in this comparison. The Review Evidence Score then compares public-rating, depth, recommendation, communication, public owner-response, consistency, and low-concern signals. Neither step evaluates legal skill or likely results.

Maps visibility stays separate

“Best observed position” is the strongest discovery position captured across the fixed query collection. Multiple offices can show the same value when observations came from different queries or backfills. It is never a score input.

Read the complete methodology →

Complete published cohort

All 17 qualified offices

Explore this market’s data →
All qualified San Francisco personal injury offices in Review Evidence Score order
RankOfficeScoreRatingTrackedAnalyzedEvidenceMaps
#1Sally Morin Personal Injury Lawyers81.14.9119118moderate#4
#2Anderson Franco, Esq.80.659888minimum#21
#3Coopers LLP | Personal Injury Law Firm77.44.95857minimum#38
#4Walkup Personal Injury Lawyers77.15159129moderate#39
#5Choulos, Choulos, & Wyle76.64.96463minimum#22
#6Law Offices of Matthew J. Quinlan76.24.96059minimum#20
#7Goodrow Law Office75.4510098minimum#17
#8Silva Injury Law, Inc.73.459896minimum#15
#9Law Brothers714.9145125moderate#27
#10Arash Law70.44.9130112moderate#13
#11Harris Personal Injury Lawyers, Inc.704.9123122moderate#11
#12Beahm Law69.64.88172minimum#47
#13Jacoby & Meyers Accident & Injury Lawyers - San Francisco63.94.814081minimum#12
#14Nadrich Accident Injury Lawyers63.54.87463minimum#37
#15Law Tigers Motorcycle Lawyers - San Francisco61.559181minimum#40
#16Dolan Law Firm, PC Personal Injury Lawyers59.34.6286243moderate#3
#17Morgan & Morgan55.84.8691180moderate#2

Questions about this comparison

Which San Francisco personal injury firms lead this review-evidence comparison?

Sally Morin Personal Injury Lawyers (81.1/100), Anderson Franco, Esq. (80.6/100), Coopers LLP | Personal Injury Law Firm (77.4/100) have the three highest Review Evidence Scores among 17 qualified offices in Law Leaderboard’s fixed San Francisco personal injury cohort. The score compares public-review evidence; it does not measure legal ability, credentials, outcomes, or fit.

How many San Francisco offices qualified for this comparison?

17 of 50 discovered office profiles passed both the review-evidence and practice-signal gates. Law Leaderboard requires at least 8 qualified offices before publishing a market page.

Does Google Maps position affect the Law Leaderboard score?

No. Maps visibility is reported as a separate discovery observation and never enters the Review Evidence Score.

Does appearing here prove that a firm specializes in personal injury matters?

No. Practice inclusion requires explicit public-profile language or sufficient context-classified review evidence. It is not a credential, specialization certification, endorsement, or outcome claim.

Sources, freshness, and limitations

Source research release llb-depth50-research-2026-08-11-r1 was materialized 2026-08-12T08:00:43Z. Practice classification uses practice-signal-v1.0.0; scoring uses review-evidence-v1.0.0. The public consumer release was published 2026-08-12.

  • The fixed discovery cohort is not a census of every law office in the market.
  • Google Maps discovery positions are captured observations, may repeat across queries, and are not scoring inputs.
  • Public reviews are incomplete, can change, and do not establish legal skill or predict a case outcome.
  • Practice evidence reflects explicit public-profile language or classified review context; it is not a credential or specialization finding.

More Personal Injury markets

View every published personal injury market →