LFL Verified 2026Personal InjuryBoston, MA● Accepting new clients
★★★★★4.0 · 112 Google reviews1 office5 attorneysEnglish
ContingencyWe handle all injury cases on a contingency basis.
FreeInitial consultation
1Practice areas
About Dane Shulman Associates
Dane Shulman Associates works from Blue Hill Avenue in Mattapan and names five attorneys. It handles injury cases on a contingency basis and says a first conversation costs nothing.
112 reviews at 4.0, the lowest average in this ranking, across a listing small enough that a handful of reviews would move it. Pillar C reads both the count and the rating against the rest of the market rather than either on its own.
What this firm has earned Every one from a measured value, with the evidence behind it
LFL Verified 2026
Every eligibility gate this firm's state allows us to check has been checked and held: licensure, discipline, entity, website and footprint. Certification additionally requires a score of 70.
No public discipline
No attorney this firm names appears as the respondent in any of the 168 published discipline decisions of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts on the discipline of attorneys, on the recommendation of the Board of Bar Overseers, 1975 to 2025. Published decisions record what has been decided, so this covers a disbarment or suspension on the record and not whether a registration is current today.
Fee terms published
We handle all injury cases on a contingency basis.
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
36out of 100
LFL Certification Score · Methodology v2.0Scored across 78 of the 91 points this firm's state lets anyone measure, out of 100 in the methodology: 9 of them need a register that Massachusetts does not publish for us to read. Anything unscored counts neither for nor against the firm.
Verified
All 5 eligibility gates passed. Certification needs more of the scale measured than we have managed here, pillar A in particular. Strongest pillar: C; most headroom in pillar A (0/25).
LFL Verified 2026
Certified needs more measured
70 needed · A+B+C floor not yet met (47% of the A, B and C points assessed)
Most headroom: A2 Experience: not yet measured (10 pts) · A6 Roster verifiability: +9 available · D2 Search authority: +7 available
G1 LicensureNot published by MAMassachusetts 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 DisciplineNo attorney this firm names appears as the respondent in any of the 168 published discipline decisions of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts on the discipline of attorneys, on the recommendation of the Board of Bar Overseers, 1975 to 2025. Published decisions record what has been decided, so this covers a disbarment or suspension on the record and not whether a registration is current today.
G3 Entity & officeNot published by MA1 physical location verified on Google Business Profile. Massachusetts publishes no business register we can query. The Secretary of the Commonwealth's corporate search answers a request for its robots file with a 403 and its search page with a redirect loop, and the state runs no open data portal carrying the register. This is a limit of the published record and not something the firm can change.
G5 WebsiteSite has served over HTTPS, a working phone number published, 5 named attorneys published.
G6 Footprint112 public client reviews across 1 Google listing, above the 10 minimum, and the firm's domain has been registered since 2002-05-22, so it has been operating for more than a year
AProfessional Standing
0/25
A2 ExperiencePendingNot yet assessed0 / 10
A6 Roster verifiabilityno queryable sourceMassachusetts publishes no attorney register we can query, so the roster is not verified here and this is not scored.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 Outcomes
6/15
B1 Results publishedFirm-submitted8 results published on the firm's own site, counted from stated amounts3 / 6
B2 SpecificityFirm-submitted5 case types named; no court or county named, so no result can be looked up3 / 5
B3 Results disclosureFirm-submittedNo prior-results disclaimer on the results page, which the New York advertising rules effectively require0 / 4
CClient Experience
12/20
C1 Authentic volumeObserved112 Google reviews · Google Business Profile via Places API. 1 listing, counts summed and rating weighted by count3 / 5
C2 Rating qualityObservedGoogle rating 4.0 over 112 reviews → Bayesian 4.39 (prior 4.82 weighted as 100 reviews, from 217 scored firms) · single platform, Google only2 / 6
C3 Review recencyGoogle5 of 5 sampled reviews are from the last 12 months (newest 2026-05-27) · a sample of five per business listing, not every review5 / 5
C5 Complaint shareGoogle1 of 5 sampled reviews rate 1 or 2 stars · a sample, so this is the shape of the complaints rather than a count of them2 / 4
DDigital Presence & Authority
5/25
D1 Website trust & experienceObservedCWV fail · no bar numbers on bios · no fee statement · privacy policy · disclaimer · fresh content2 / 7
D3 Local presenceGoogle1 operational Google Business Profile listing with reviews · profile completeness, NAP consistency across citations and local-pack rank not yet measured (4 of 5 pts still available)1 / 5
E1 Free consult & fee transparencyObservedFree consultation · We handle all injury cases on a contingency basis. · the fee percentage itself is not published5 / 6
Case results Only results verified against court records or documentation show amounts
What the firm publishes itself
Dane Shulman Associates lists 8 case results on its own website, across 5 case types. The page carries no 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.
motor vehicletruckpremiseswrongful deathpedestrian
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.
The firm’s people the firm names its people without saying who among them practises law · 5 more people are named by the firm without a role, so we do not call them attorneys
Also named by the firm
The firm lists these people among its team and prints no role beside the names, so we do not describe them as attorneys.
Michael P. Kambouris
Daniel E. Pogoda
Yifan (Molly) Zhang
Philip A. Bongiorno
James Ostendorf
Client reviews
4.0
★★★★★
Based on 112 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