1. Home
  2. Baltimore, MD
  3. Personal Injury
  4. Shultz Legal

Shultz Legal

ListedPersonal InjuryBaltimore, MD● Accepting new clients
★★★★★ 4.9 · 291 Google reviews2 offices0 attorneysEnglish
Not statedFee model
FreeInitial consultation
1Practice areas

About Shultz Legal

Shultz Legal is a personal injury firm with offices in Baltimore and Bowie.

The firm states that the first consultation is free. It does not state a fee model on its public pages, so none is recorded here.

What this firm has earned Every one from a measured value, with the evidence behind it

4.91 average over 291 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.

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

26out of 100
LFL Certification Score · Methodology v2.0Scored across 78 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 A (0/25).

Certified needs more measured
70 needed · A+B+C floor not yet met (41% 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) · D2 Search authority: +8 available
G1 LicensureNot published by MDMaryland 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 MDMaryland does not publish a disciplinary register we can query.
G3 Entity & officeNot published by MD2 physical locations verified on Google Business Profile. Maryland publishes no business register we can query. SDAT's entity search is a form rather than a dataset, its bulk data is sold rather than published, and the state's open data portal carries a count of businesses instead of the register. This is a limit of the published record and not something the firm can change.
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 Footprint291 public client reviews across 2 Google listings, above the 10 minimum, and the firm's domain has been registered since 2017-07-23, so it has been operating for more than a year
Professional Standing
0/25
A2 ExperiencePendingNot yet assessed0 / 10
A6 Roster verifiabilityPendingNo attorney is named on the site we could read0 / 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
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
16/20
C1 Authentic volumeObserved291 Google reviews · Google Business Profile via Places API. 2 listings, counts summed and rating weighted by count4 / 5
C2 Rating qualityObservedGoogle rating 4.91 over 291 reviews → Bayesian 4.89 (prior 4.82 weighted as 100 reviews, from 217 scored firms) · single platform, Google only5 / 6
C3 Review recencyGoogle2 of 10 sampled reviews are from the last 12 months (newest 2026-09-02) · a sample of five per business listing, not every review2.5 / 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
4/25
D1 Website trust & experienceObservedCWV fail · no bar numbers on bios · no fee statement · privacy policy · no disclaimer · fresh content1.5 / 7
D2 Search authorityAhrefs · 2026-09-16DR 5 → 8th pct of 26-firm cohort (median 19) 0/3 · 473 referring domains, 19th pct 0/2 · 35 organic keywords / 136 visits·mo, 23th pct 0/2 · brand demand 0/1 (pending)0 / 8
D3 Local presenceGoogle2 operational Google Business Profile listings with reviews · profile completeness, NAP consistency across citations and local-pack rank not yet measured (4 of 5 pts still available)1 / 5
D4 Content, E-E-A-T & schemaAhrefs · 2026-09-16content 0/2 · JSON-LD detected 1/1 · earned media 0/11 / 5
EAccess & Responsiveness
1/15
E1 Free consult & fee transparencyObservedFree consultation · fee model not published · the fee percentage itself is not published1 / 6
E3 Languages & accessibilityObservedEnglish0 / 4
E4 AvailabilityObservedno availability published0 / 5
Next automated re-check: Oct 1, 2026 · Cohort: Maryland x Personal Injury (27 firms measured)How the score works →

Digital presence snapshot

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

Domain authority
5· 8th percentile
473 ref. domains · cohort median 19 · Ahrefs rank 27.9M
Observed · Ahrefs, 2026-09-16
Trust pages
2 / 2
blog · privacy policy
Observed
Core Web Vitals
Failmobile
Performance 47
Observed · PSI, 2026-09-14

Practice areas 1 areas · primary focus highlighted

Personal Injury

Client reviews

4.9
★★★★★
Based on 291 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: Baltimore

Baltimore8615 Ridgelys Choice Dr #212, Baltimore, MD 21236, USA
Bowie6915 Laurel - Bowie Rd #206, Bowie, MD 20715, USA