1. Home
  2. Los Angeles, CA
  3. Personal Injury
  4. Law Offices of Scott Glovsky

Law Offices of Scott Glovsky

LFL Verified 2026Personal InjuryLos Angeles, CA● Accepting new clients
★★★★★ 4.7 · 51 Google reviews2 offices67 attorneysEnglish
ContingencyFee model
FreeInitial consultation
7Practice areas

About Law Offices of Scott Glovsky

Law Offices of Scott Glovsky is a personal injury firm with offices in Claremont and Pasadena.

The firm states that it works on a contingency fee, with nothing to pay unless the case is won; the first consultation is free.

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 named attorney carries a disbarment, a suspension or a disciplinary resignation on the State Bar of California's record, across the 2 we identified. Administrative suspensions, which the State Bar states are non-disciplinary, are not counted here

26 years average at the bar

Mean 25.5 years since admission across 2 of 67 named attorneys (longest 32, shortest 19) · NYS Attorney Registration database

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

55out of 100
LFL Certification Score · Methodology v2.0Scored across 87 of the 87 points this firm's state lets anyone measure, out of 100 in the methodology: 13 of them need a register that California does not publish for us to read. Anything unscored counts neither for nor against the firm.

Verified

4 of 5 eligibility gates passed. 1 could not be answered from the available records (G3) and does not count against the firm. Strongest pillar: B; most headroom in pillar E (3/15).

LFL Verified 2026
10 points to Certified
65 needed · A+B+C floor met (63% of the A, B and C points assessed)
Most headroom: A6 Roster verifiability: +8 available · E4 Availability: +5 available · C3 Review recency: +4 available
G1 Licensure2 of 63 named attorneys hold an active California licence and none carries an adverse status. 61 name(s) could not be told apart from namesakes and are counted neither way
G2 DisciplineNo named attorney carries a disbarment, a suspension or a disciplinary resignation on the State Bar of California's record, across the 2 we identified. Administrative suspensions, which the State Bar states are non-disciplinary, are not counted here
G3 Entity & officeNot published by CA2 physical locations verified on Google Business Profile. California 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 WebsiteSite has served over HTTPS, a working phone number published, 68 named attorneys published.
G6 Footprint51 public client reviews across 2 Google listings, above the 10 minimum, and the firm's domain has been registered since 2011-08-02, so it has been operating for more than a year
Professional Standing
14/25
A2 ExperienceRegistryMean 25.5 years since admission across 2 of 67 named attorneys (longest 32, shortest 19) · NYS Attorney Registration database10 / 10
A6 Roster verifiabilityRegistry2 of 67 named attorneys matched to the California register; no bar number published on any bio1 / 9
A5 AccountabilityObservedmember of 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
11/15
B1 Results publishedFirm-submitted6 results published on the firm's own site, counted from stated amounts3 / 6
B2 SpecificityFirm-submitted2 case types named; 1 court or county reference4 / 5
B3 Results disclosureFirm-submittedPrior-results disclaimer present beside the published results4 / 4
CClient Experience
11/20
C1 Authentic volumeObserved51 Google reviews · Google Business Profile via Places API. 2 listings, counts summed and rating weighted by count2 / 5
C2 Rating qualityObservedGoogle rating 4.71 over 51 reviews → Bayesian 4.79 (prior 4.83 weighted as 100 reviews, from 1410 scored firms) · single platform, Google only4 / 6
C3 Review recencyGoogle0 of 10 sampled reviews are from the last 12 months (newest 2025-08-15) · a sample of five per business listing, not every review1 / 5
C5 Complaint shareGoogle0 of 10 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 & Authority
8/25
D1 Website trust & experienceObservedCWV fail · no fee statement · no 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 firm1.5 / 5
D2 Search authorityAhrefs · 2026-10-19DR 32.0 → 83th pct of 141-firm cohort (median 13) 2/3 · 1,332 referring domains, 68th pct 1/2 · 317 organic keywords / 920 visits·mo, 79th pct 2/2 · brand demand 0/1 (pending)5 / 8
D3 Local presenceGoogle2 operational Google Business Profile listings · 10 or more photos, which is where the API stops counting · 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 unearned1 / 1
D4 Content, E-E-A-T & schemaAhrefs · 2026-10-19JSON-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 & Responsiveness
3/15
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: Los Angeles Personal Injury (144 firms measured)How the score works →

Digital presence snapshot

Pillar D signals, re-measured monthly. Paid advertising is not scored.

Domain authority
32· 81th percentile
1,332 ref. domains · cohort median 13.5 · Ahrefs rank 3.5M
Observed · Ahrefs, 2026-10-19
Trust pages
3 / 3
attorney bios · blog · disclaimer
Observed
Core Web Vitals
Failmobile
Performance 50
Observed · PSI, 2026-10-12

Case results Only results verified against court records or documentation show amounts

What the firm publishes itself

Law Offices of Scott Glovsky lists 6 case results on its own website, across 2 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.

motor vehiclewrongful death
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.

Attorneys 4 attorneys · 2 of 4 licences checked against the California attorney register · 63 more people are named by the firm without a role, so we do not call them attorneys

SG
Scott GlovskyAdmitted in CA
KE
Karl EvangelistaAdmitted in CA
LD
LA Molina Healthcare DenialAttorney
RD
Retinal Disorder Treatment DenialAttorney

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.

Client reviews

4.7
★★★★★
Based on 51 Google reviews · Google Business Profile via Places API. 2 listings, counts summed and rating weighted by count · Quotes below are testimonials published by the firm

Offices 2 locations · main office: Claremont

Claremont343 Harvard Ave N, Claremont, CA 91711, USA
Pasadena299 N Euclid Ave Second Floor, Pasadena, CA 91101, USA