- Home
- Chicago, IL
- Personal Injury
- Chicago Injury Lawyer: Law Office of Paul M. Marriett
Chicago Injury Lawyer: Law Office of Paul M. Marriett
ListedPersonal InjuryChicago, IL● Accepting new clients
ContingencyFee model
FreeInitial consultation
8Practice areas
About Chicago Injury Lawyer: Law Office of Paul M. Marriett
Chicago Injury Lawyer: Law Office of Paul M. Marriett works from North Wacker Drive and names no attorney on the pages we could reach.
72 reviews at 4.8. Contingency fees and a free consultation, published. It publishes five case results with amounts of its own and they are its figures rather than ones we confirmed.
LFL Certification Score Scored under Methodology v2.0 · rows tagged Registry, Observed or Ahrefs are measured; rows tagged Illustrative are sample values pending full verification
49out of 100
LFL Certification Score · Methodology v2.0Scored across 68 of the 68 points this firm's state lets anyone measure, out of 100 in the methodology: 32 of them need a register that Illinois does not publish for us to read. Anything unscored counts neither for nor against the firm.
Listed
1 eligibility gate(s) still to be checked. 3 could not be answered from the available records (G1, G2, G3) and do not count against the firm. Strongest pillar: B; most headroom in pillar A (0/25).
16 points to Certified
65 needed · A+B+C floor not yet met (58% of the A, B and C points assessed)
Most headroom: A2 Experience: +10 available · A6 Roster verifiability: +9 available · D2 Search authority: +5 available
G1 LicensureNot published by ILIllinois does not publish an attorney register we can query, so licensure is not verified here. The state's own attorney search is the place to check it.
G2 DisciplineNot published by ILIllinois does not publish a disciplinary register we can query.
G3 Entity & officeNot published by IL1 physical location verified on Google Business Profile. Illinois publishes no business register we are able to query, so the registration itself is not verified here. The state's own business search is the place to check it.
G5 WebsiteNot checkedSite has served over HTTPS, a working phone number published, no attorney is named on the site we could read. The gate also asks for no misleading claims, which is an editorial read we have not recorded.
G6 Footprint72 public client reviews across 1 Google listing, above the 10 minimum, and the firm's domain has been registered since 2003-07-31, so it has been operating for more than a year
AProfessional Standing0/25
A2 Experienceno queryable sourceIllinois publishes no attorney register we can query, so years since admission cannot be established here for any firm and this is not scored.0 / 10
A6 Roster verifiabilityno roster publishedOur crawl found no roster on this firm's site, so there is nothing here to verify against a register. Publishing one, or telling us where it is, is what gate G5 asks for.0 / 9
A5 AccountabilityObservedno bar or trial lawyers' association named on the pages we read · no professional liability cover disclosed, which is not scored here: plaintiff firms in this market do not publish it, and an absence shared by every firm separates none of them0 / 3
BPublished Outcomes10/15
B1 Results publishedFirm-submitted5 results published on the firm's own site, counted from stated amounts3 / 6
B2 SpecificityFirm-submitted6 case types named; no court or county named, so no result can be looked up3 / 5
B3 Results disclosureFirm-submittedPrior-results disclaimer present beside the published results4 / 4
CClient Experience12/20
C1 Authentic volumeObserved72 Google reviews · Google Business Profile via Places API. 1 listing, counts summed and rating weighted by count2 / 5
C2 Rating qualityObservedGoogle rating 4.8 over 72 reviews → Bayesian 4.82 (prior 4.83 weighted as 100 reviews, from 1410 scored firms) · single platform, Google only5 / 6
C3 Review recencyGoogle0 of 5 sampled reviews are from the last 12 months (newest 2025-03-27) · a sample of five per business listing, not every review1 / 5
C5 Complaint shareGoogle0 of 5 sampled reviews rate 1 or 2 stars · a sample, so this is the shape of the complaints rather than a count of them4 / 4
DDigital Presence & Authority8/25
D1 Website trust & experienceObservedCWV pass · no fee statement · privacy policy · disclaimer · fresh content · scored out of 5 of the 7: nothing has measured accessibility or bar numbers on bios here yet, so it is not counted against this firm4 / 5
D2 Search authorityAhrefs · 2026-09-26DR 7 → 28th pct of 109-firm cohort (median 18) 1/3 · 1,914 referring domains, 85th pct 2/2 · 0 organic keywords / 0 visits·mo, 4th pct 0/2 · brand demand 0/1 (pending)3 / 8
D3 Local presenceGoogle1 operational Google Business Profile listing · 0 photos · 5 categories, hours published, which almost every listing here has and so separates nobody · the services list, Q&A and recent posts are owner-side fields the Places API does not expose, and NAP consistency across citations and local-pack rank have no source here, so the rest of this sub-factor leaves the scale rather than being scored as unearned0 / 1
D4 Content, E-E-A-T & schemaAhrefs · 2026-09-26JSON-LD detected 1/1 · not assessed on any firm yet, so content depth and earned media and AI citations leave the scale (4 pts)1 / 1
EAccess & Responsiveness3/15
E1 Free consult & fee transparencyObservedFree consultation · Contingency · the fee percentage itself is not published3 / 6
E3 Languages & accessibilityObservedEnglish0 / 4
E4 AvailabilityObservedno availability published0 / 5
Next automated re-check: Nov 1, 2026 · Cohort: Chicago Personal Injury (110 firms measured)How the score works →
Digital presence snapshot
Pillar D signals, re-measured monthly. Paid advertising is not scored.
Domain authority
7· 28th percentile
1,914 ref. domains · cohort median 18 · Ahrefs rank 22.4M
Observed · Ahrefs, 2026-09-26Trust pages
3 / 3
disclaimer · privacy policy · blog
ObservedCore Web Vitals
Passmobile
Performance 98
Observed · PSI, 2026-09-26Practice areas 8 areas · primary focus highlighted
Case results Only results verified against court records or documentation show amounts
What the firm publishes itself
Chicago Injury Lawyer: Law Office of Paul M. Marriett lists 5 case results on its own website, across 6 case types. The page carries its own disclaimer about past results. We have read the page and counted what is on it. We have not confirmed the amounts, so none are repeated here.
constructionmotor vehicletruckmedical malpracticewrongful deathworkplace
See the firm's own results page ↗Results are specific to their facts and do not guarantee similar outcomes. Firms submit results through their claimed profile; only results we can substantiate are published with amounts.
Client reviews
4.8
★★★★★
Based on 72 Google reviews · Google Business Profile via Places API. 1 listing, counts summed and rating weighted by count · Quotes below are testimonials published by the firm
Offices 1 location · main office: Chicago
Chicago101 N Wacker Dr Ste 100B, Chicago, IL 60606, USA
Frequently asked questions
How much does Chicago Injury Lawyer: Law Office of Paul M. Marriett charge?
Chicago Injury Lawyer: Law Office of Paul M. Marriett publishes a contingency fee, which means the fee is a share of what the case recovers and there is nothing to pay if it recovers nothing. The rate itself is not published, so ask for it in writing, along with how case expenses are handled and whether they come out of the recovery before or after the fee. The first consultation is free, which is the place to ask.
Does Chicago Injury Lawyer: Law Office of Paul M. Marriett offer a free consultation?
Yes. Chicago Injury Lawyer: Law Office of Paul M. Marriett publishes a free initial consultation.
Where does Chicago Injury Lawyer: Law Office of Paul M. Marriett have offices?
Chicago Injury Lawyer: Law Office of Paul M. Marriett publishes one office, in Chicago. Addresses and the Google listing behind each one are on this profile under Offices.
Who are the attorneys at Chicago Injury Lawyer: Law Office of Paul M. Marriett?
Chicago Injury Lawyer: Law Office of Paul M. Marriett names no attorney on the public pages we could read. That is a gap in what the firm publishes rather than a statement about who works there, and it is why the licensure and discipline checks on this profile have nothing to run against.
Are the case results Chicago Injury Lawyer: Law Office of Paul M. Marriett publishes verified?
No. Chicago Injury Lawyer: Law Office of Paul M. Marriett publishes five case results with amounts on its own site. We counted them and we did not confirm them: the figures are the firm's. Pillar B scores whether a firm publishes outcomes and discloses them properly, including whether a prior-results disclaimer appears beside them, not whether the amounts are right. Past results do not predict another case.
What has Law Firm Listings verified about Chicago Injury Lawyer: Law Office of Paul M. Marriett?
Chicago Injury Lawyer: Law Office of Paul M. Marriett scores 47 and sits at Listed. Passed: footprint. Did not pass: website. Could not be answered from any public source and therefore counts neither for nor against the firm: licensure, discipline and entity registration. Every row of the scorecard above names where the value came from and when it was read. Nothing on this profile was supplied by the firm for payment, and no placement here can be bought.