- Home
- Chicago, IL
- Personal Injury
- Trapp & Geller
Trapp & Geller
LFL Certified 2026 · Score 66Personal InjuryChicago, IL● Accepting new clients
Contingency
We bill clients on a contingency fee basis, meaning we only get paid if we secure compensation for you.
FreeInitial consultation
8Practice areas
About Trapp & Geller
Trapp & Geller works from West Washington Street in Chicago, with a second office in Northbrook, and names nine attorneys.
239 reviews at 5.0 across two listings. Contingency fees and a free consultation, published. It publishes 19 case results with amounts of its own and they are its figures rather than ones we confirmed.
What this firm has earned Every one from a measured value, with the evidence behind it
LFL Certified 2026
Scored 66 out of 100 on measured evidence, above the 70 this tier requires, with every eligibility gate its state allows us to check cleared.
5 average over 239 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.
Fee terms published
We bill clients on a contingency fee basis, meaning we only get paid if we secure compensation for you.
19 results published
Across 9 case types on the firm's own site. We read the page and counted what is on it; the amounts are the firm's and we have not confirmed them.
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
66out 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.
LFL Certified
2 of 5 eligibility gates passed. 3 could not be answered from the available records (G1, G2, G3) and do not count against the firm. Strongest pillar: C; most headroom in pillar A (3/25).
LFL Certified 2026 · re-verified Oct 24, 202612 points to Distinguished
78 needed · A+B+C floor met (88% 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 IL2 physical locations 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 WebsiteSite has served over HTTPS, a working phone number published, 9 named attorneys published.
G6 Footprint239 public client reviews across 2 Google listings, above the 10 minimum, and the firm's domain has been registered since 2002-10-14, so it has been operating for more than a year
AProfessional Standing3/25
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 queryable sourceIllinois publishes no attorney register we can query, so the roster is not verified here and this is not scored.0 / 9
A5 AccountabilityObservedmember of American Bar Association, American Association for Justice · 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 Outcomes12/15
B1 Results publishedFirm-submitted19 results published on the firm's own site, counted from stated amounts4.5 / 6
B2 SpecificityFirm-submitted9 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 Experience19/20
C1 Authentic volumeObserved239 Google reviews · Google Business Profile via Places API. 2 listings, counts summed and rating weighted by count4 / 5
C2 Rating qualityObservedGoogle rating 5.0 over 239 reviews → Bayesian 4.95 (prior 4.83 weighted as 100 reviews, from 1410 scored firms) · single platform, Google only6 / 6
C3 Review recencyGoogle7 of 8 sampled reviews are from the last 12 months (newest 2026-09-01) · a sample of five per business listing, not every review5 / 5
C5 Complaint shareGoogle0 of 8 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 & Authority6/25
D1 Website trust & experienceObservedCWV fail · no fee statement · privacy policy · no 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 · 2026-09-26DR 7 → 28th pct of 109-firm cohort (median 18) 1/3 · 830 referring domains, 26th pct 1/2 · 41 organic keywords / 225 visits·mo, 39th pct 1/2 · brand demand 0/1 (pending)3 / 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 · 2026-09-26JSON-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 & Responsiveness5/15
E1 Free consult & fee transparencyObservedFree consultation · “We bill clients on a contingency fee basis, meaning we only get paid if we secure compensation for you.” · the fee percentage itself is not published5 / 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
830 ref. domains · cohort median 18 · Ahrefs rank 24.0M
Observed · Ahrefs, 2026-09-26Trust pages
3 / 3
privacy policy · attorney bios · blog
ObservedCore Web Vitals
Failmobile
Performance 55
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
Trapp & Geller lists 19 case results on its own website, across 9 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 vehicletruckpremisesmedical malpracticewrongful deathworkplacepedestrianproduct liability
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 · listed by the firm, licensure not yet checked against the Illinois attorney register · 3 more people are named by the firm without a role, so we do not call them attorneys
JT
Jamie M. TrappPartner
DA
Daniel J. AlerAttorney
JK
John P. KolbPartner
JG
Jeremy L. GellerManaging Partner
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
5.0
★★★★★
Based on 239 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: Chicago
Chicago111 W Washington St #1500, Chicago, IL 60606, USA
Northbrook707 Skokie Blvd #310, Northbrook, IL 60062, USA
Frequently asked questions
How much does Trapp & Geller charge?
Trapp & Geller 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 Trapp & Geller offer a free consultation?
Yes. Trapp & Geller publishes a free initial consultation.
Where does Trapp & Geller have offices?
Trapp & Geller publishes two offices, in Chicago and Northbrook. Addresses and the Google listing behind each one are on this profile under Offices.
Who are the attorneys at Trapp & Geller?
Trapp & Geller names nine attorneys on its own site, and each is listed on this profile with the page we read them from. They have not been checked against a state register: Illinois 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.
Are the case results Trapp & Geller publishes verified?
No. Trapp & Geller publishes 19 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 Trapp & Geller?
Trapp & Geller scores 64 and sits at Verified. Passed: website and footprint. 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.