Direct answer · depth-50 consumer intelligence

Compare Workers' Compensation law firms in Denver, CO

Fang Injury & Accident Lawyers Denver (85.5/100), Zaner Law Personal Injury and Car Accident Attorneys (83.0/100), The Frickey Law Firm (73.4/100) have the three highest Review Evidence Scores among 14 qualified offices in Law Leaderboard’s fixed Denver workers' compensation cohort. The score compares public-review evidence; it does not measure legal ability, credentials, outcomes, or fit.

14qualified offices
8,888review texts analyzed
67.5median evidence score
28%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 Denver workers' compensation offices by Review Evidence Score
Rank / officeScoreRatingTracked reviewsTexts analyzedPractice evidenceMaps visibility
#1Fang Injury & Accident Lawyers Denver 85.5 5 781 729 Published practice evidence #25
#2Zaner Law Personal Injury and Car Accident Attorneys 83 4.9 429 407 Published practice evidence #8
#3The Frickey Law Firm 73.4 4.8 358 311 Profile + review context #40
#4Amy G Injury Firm 72.7 4.9 1,794 1,560 Profile + review context #28
#5Ramos Law Personal Injury & Accident Lawyers - Denver 69.6 4.7 226 204 Published practice evidence #42

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.

#4 in this cohort

Amy G Injury Firm

72.7score
Rating
4.9/5
Analyzed
1,560
Maps
#28

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

Review full office evidence →

#8 in this cohort

Cliff Enten Law

66.9score
Rating
4.8/5
Analyzed
281
Maps
#15

Practice basis: Published practice evidence. Evidence depth: strong. 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 6 were observed within the first 20. Discovery visibility and review evidence can tell different stories.

Review concentration

Top five hold 32.6%

The five most-reviewed qualified offices account for 32.6% of tracked reviews. The review-volume HHI is 1302.4, a descriptive concentration measure rather than a quality score.

How practice and review evidence differ

For workers-compensation comparisons, the practice-evidence gate links included profiles to public practice language or sufficient context-classified review evidence after the review input gate. This supports consistent market comparison from available public signals. It does not show specialization, credentials, legal ability, expected results, or whether an office is suitable for a specific worker’s situation.

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 14 qualified offices

Explore this market’s data →
All qualified Denver workers' compensation offices in Review Evidence Score order
RankOfficeScoreRatingTrackedAnalyzedEvidenceMaps
#1Fang Injury & Accident Lawyers Denver85.55781729strong#25
#2Zaner Law Personal Injury and Car Accident Attorneys834.9429407strong#8
#3The Frickey Law Firm73.44.8358311strong#40
#4Amy G Injury Firm72.74.91,7941,560extensive#28
#5Ramos Law Personal Injury & Accident Lawyers - Denver69.64.7226204moderate#42
#6The Wilhite Law Firm68.64.9148138moderate#9
#7Bachus & Schanker, Personal Injury Lawyers | Denver Office68.14.71,9321,751extensive#5
#8Cliff Enten Law66.94.8313281strong#15
#9Alverson + O'Brien, P.C.65.74.67773minimum#35
#10Frank Azar Car & Truck Accident Lawyers - Denver, Colorado65.44.92,1851,279extensive#7
#11The Wilhite Law Firm - Personal Injury Attorneys65.34.71,5711,383extensive#3
#12Levine Law Accident Attorneys - Denver63.14.6292210moderate#27
#13Frank Azar Car & Truck Accident Lawyers - Lakeside, Colorado614.8474253strong#50
#14McDivitt Law Firm56.54.5430309strong#48

Questions about this comparison

Which Denver workers' compensation firms lead this review-evidence comparison?

Fang Injury & Accident Lawyers Denver (85.5/100), Zaner Law Personal Injury and Car Accident Attorneys (83.0/100), The Frickey Law Firm (73.4/100) have the three highest Review Evidence Scores among 14 qualified offices in Law Leaderboard’s fixed Denver workers' compensation cohort. The score compares public-review evidence; it does not measure legal ability, credentials, outcomes, or fit.

How many Denver offices qualified for this comparison?

14 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 workers' compensation 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 Workers' Compensation markets

View every published workers' compensation market →