ListedPersonal InjuryDallas, TX● Accepting new clients
★★★★★4.9 · 392 Google reviews1 office0 attorneysEnglish · Spanish
ContingencyFee model
FreeInitial consultation
1Practice areas
About Guerrero Law Injury Lawyers
Guerrero Law works from West Commerce Street in Oak Cliff, publishes in Spanish and answers the fee question plainly on its own FAQ: it gets paid if the client gets paid.
392 reviews at 4.9. It publishes none of the trust pages pillar D looks for, no privacy policy, no disclaimer and no blog, and it names no attorney on the pages we could reach.
What this firm has earned Every one from a measured value, with the evidence behind it
392 client reviews
Counted across 1 verified Google Business Profile listings, not collected by us and not solicited through us.
4.9 average over 392 reviews
A high rating is easy at low volume and hard to hold at this one. Pillar C scores it against the market rather than against five stars.
Service in Spanish
Published by the firm on its own pages, which is how this was measured rather than assumed from a name.
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
40out of 100
LFL Certification Score · Methodology v2.0Scored across 71 of the 100 points this firm's state lets anyone measure. Anything unscored counts neither for nor against the firm.
Listed
1 eligibility gate(s) still to be checked. Certification needs more of the scale measured than we have managed here, pillar A in particular. Strongest pillar: C; most headroom in pillar B (0/15).
Certified needs more measured
70 needed · A+B+C floor not yet met (58% of the A, B and C points assessed)
Most headroom: A2 Experience: not yet measured (10 pts) · A6 Roster verifiability: not yet measured (9 pts) · D1 Website trust & experience: not yet measured (7 pts)
G1 LicensureNot published by TXTexas 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 TXTexas does not publish a disciplinary register we can query.
G3 Entity & officeNot published by TX1 physical location verified on Google Business Profile. We read the Active Franchise Taxpayers (data.texas.gov 9cir-efmm), published as open data by the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts, which carries the Secretary of State file number, charter date and status and could not identify this firm in it: 3 entity name(s) contain the firm's name and none of them agrees on both the name and the city. A miss there is not evidence that the firm is unregistered, so this gate is unresolved rather than failed. The franchise tax does not reach a sole proprietorship or a general partnership, so this register can confirm an entity and cannot rule one out.
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 Footprint392 public client reviews across 1 Google listing, above the 10 minimum, and the firm's domain has been registered since 2000-03-30, so it has been operating for more than a year
AProfessional Standing
3/25
A2 ExperiencePendingNot yet assessed0 / 10
A6 Roster verifiabilityPendingNo attorney is named on the site we could read0 / 9
A5 AccountabilityObservedmember of Association of Trial Lawyers of America, American Bar Association · 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 them3 / 3
BPublished Outcomes
0/15
B1 Results publishedFirm-submittedThe firm publishes no case results we could read0 / 6
B2 SpecificityFirm-submitted0 case types named; no court or county named, so no result can be looked up0 / 5
B3 Results disclosureFirm-submittedNo prior-results disclaimer on the results page, which the New York advertising rules effectively require0 / 4
CClient Experience
19/20
C1 Authentic volumeObserved392 Google reviews · Google Business Profile via Places API. 1 listing, counts summed and rating weighted by count5 / 5
C2 Rating qualityObservedGoogle rating 4.9 over 392 reviews → Bayesian 4.88 (prior 4.82 weighted as 100 reviews, from 217 scored firms) · single platform, Google only5 / 6
C3 Review recencyGoogle5 of 5 sampled reviews are from the last 12 months (newest 2026-06-09) · a sample of five per business listing, not every review5 / 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
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
Based on 392 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