For at least a decade, the prevailing advice in search engine optimization (SEO) has been that longer content reliably outranks shorter content. While studies conducted on the internet-at-large have confirmed that, there wasn’t any reliable research particularly focused on law firms and how word count correlates with their rankings. On CLM’s blog, the company said most data “comes from broader studies of B2C affiliate content, recipe blogs, and various small-business websites. A study of recipe blog rankings is not a study of how Google ranks your law firm.”

The new study finds that while word count does have a statistically detectable relationship with where a law firm page appears on Google, the effect is significantly weaker than commonly believed and varies dramatically by practice area and geographic market.

“Word count has been treated like a settled question in law firm SEO,” said Jason Bland, Co-Founder of Custom Legal Marketing. “The advice for years has been to write longer pages, and there has been almost no industry-specific data behind that recommendation. We decided to run the numbers ourselves. What we found should change how a lot of law firms and their marketing companies approach their content strategy.”

Among the most notable findings, the median word count for top-ranking law firm pages varies by a factor of four across practice areas. Employment law pages ranking at the top of Google have a median length of 428 words. Personal injury pages in the same top position have a median length of 1,691 words. Family law, estate planning, and business law all fall at distinctly different points along the same range, indicating that a one-size-fits-all content target does not reflect how Google actually ranks legal pages.

Geography also plays a substantial role. Across the 24 metro areas studied, the median word count for ranking law firm pages varied by a factor of two. Texas markets clustered well below the overall median. Northern and coastal markets clustered higher. The study found that two firms in different parts of the country could be competing on the same keyword and ranking with pages of very different lengths.

The report also examined individual search results pages directly. When the longest law firm page in a given search result was compared against shorter competitors, it held the top position less than 30 percent of the time, only marginally better than random chance would predict.

“Content quality matters. Search intent matching matters,” Bland added. “What the study shows is that the same word count target applied to every practice area and every market doesn’t reflect what’s actually happening on Google and it doesn’t reflect improved performance.”

The complete research report, Does Word Count Matter for Google Rankings?, includes practice-area-by-practice-area breakdowns, metro-level analysis for each of the 24 cities surveyed, within-SERP competitor comparisons, and the full methodology.

Custom Legal Marketing’s AI marketing platform, Sequoia, is always running experiments and most of the discoveries become proprietary entries into the system’s knowledge base. However, this year the company has released some of their platform’s findings to the public.

According to the complaint, Benson Fischer — who states he has never met or spoken to Dennis Yu, became the target of an online campaign that commenced in April 2025. The complaint asserts the conflict stems from Fischer’s work as a business and franchise consultant for 12 franchisees of Nautical Bowls, who were in a legal dispute with the parent franchising company.

Extortion and “Digital Warfare”

Benson Fischer alleges that Yu, who established a professional relationship with Nautical Bowls in 2024, used LinkedIn and various internet platforms in an effort to harass Fischer. The goal, according to the filing, was to pressure Benson Fischer into abandoning his consulting role and halt his assistance to attorney Richard Schimel in the franchisees’ pursuit of a settlement.

Fischer alleges that Yu’s conduct escalated into what it describes as a “digital warfare” strategy, including:

• Cybersquatting: The complaint alleges Yu purchased domain names including Benson-Fischer.com and BensonFisher.com without consent to use as a weapon.
• SEO Manipulation: The complaint states Yu used these domains and the name “ZivZo” in numerous URLs to elevate disparaging content in Google search results.
• Targeting Legal Counsel: The lawsuit alleges Yu also purchased the domain RichardSchimel.com to post articles criticizing Fischer’s attorney’s website and used unauthorized photographs of Schimel in his postings.

Nautical Bowls Connection

The litigation against Yu is proceeding alongside a related action. In a separate case filed in the same court, Benson Fischer has also sued Nautical Bowls Franchising Company, LLC (Case No. 8:25-cv-02286), also seeking $6 million in damages.

The second complaint alleges that Nautical Bowls Franchising Company conspired with Dennis Yu after Nautical Bowls’ attack on Fischer failed. The complaint alleges that Nautical Bowls efforts were designed to obstruct Fischer’s consulting services and interfere with the franchisees’ pursuit of a resolution.

Dennis Yu’s Refusal to Remove Content

After five days of mediation in September 2025, Benson Fischer and Richard Schimel settled all of the franchisees’ claims. According to the complaint, Yu has not removed the posts referencing Fischer and ZivZo, and Fischer’s requests for removal have been unsuccessful.

According to court filings, Yu’s year-long online activity includes more than 20 articles that the complaint characterizes as containing a “mix of fabrications and unsubstantiated statements about Fischer, his marketing firm ZivZo”, and his legal counsel, Richard Schimel.

Benson Fischer further alleges that Yu has conditioned removal of the posts on a monetary payment and the dismissal of Fischer’s federal lawsuit. Court records show that Yu did not file any counterclaims to justify such financial demand.

Over the past year, Benson Fischer has filed four Peace Order petitions (restraining orders) and obtained temporary court orders directing Yu to cease his online activity referencing Fischer and ZivZo and to remove all related posts. According to the complaint, to secure a permanent order Yu must be served by a process server or a local Sheriff’s Department, and service has been attempted nearly 30 times without success.

Dennis Yu’s Pattern of Behavior

The Maryland complaint alleges what it characterizes as a “pattern of behavior” by Yu involving other individuals and legal professionals. Fischer’s complaint references a separate case in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Case No. 9:25-cv-80391), which the Maryland complaint describes as similar in nature.

In the Florida case, Yu engaged in similar conduct involving Lisa T. Miller and her legal counsel, including former State Attorney Dave Aronberg and attorney L.A. Perkins. The Maryland complaint alleges that, as in the Fischer matter, the Florida case involved allegations that Yu purchased domains containing the attorneys’ names.

CASE INFORMATION

U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
ZivZo, LLC & Benson J. Fischer v. Dennis Yu
Case No. 8:25-CV-02075-PX

The Award of Distinction recognizes projects that exceed industry standards in quality and achievement.

“We’ve spent two decades helping law firms tell their stories online, and our website is where we tell ours,” said Jason Bland, Co-Founder and CEO of Custom Legal Marketing.

A website built as a working resource for legal marketers

The Custom Legal Marketing website is structured less like a typical agency brochure and more like a working library for law firm marketers. Visitors can move fluidly between deep service explanations, technical guides, case studies, and primary research.

The redesign includes:

• A growing Knowledge section featuring CLM’s original research, including its widely cited PageSpeed and law firm SEO analysis and its study on whether law firms are using AI content to rank at the top of Google search. Studies are presented with methodology, sample sizes, statistical findings, and visualizations, not just conclusions.
• A dedicated Answer Engine Optimization (AEO) hub covering ChatGPT SEO, Google AI Overview optimization for lawyers, and Perplexity SEO, alongside link building strategy and lawyer keyword research.
• A Schema for Lawyers library with practical, code-level guides covering Article, Person, Event, Video, Local Business, and Breadcrumbs schema markup.
• Downloadable keyword reports for nearly every practice area, drawn from CLM’s research data.
• A dedicated Sequoia section introducing CLM’s proprietary AI-powered marketing intelligence platform, built entirely in-house and now deployed across the agency’s client base.

A portfolio that extends far beyond website design

While custom.legal showcases CLM’s design and development capability, the agency’s service portfolio reaches considerably further. Under the “What We Do” section of the site, CLM offers law firm marketing strategy, branding, content marketing, email marketing, PPC management, press and public relations, social media marketing, video production, and AI legal marketing, in addition to website design and development.

CLM works across multiple practice areas, including personal injury, employment law, family law, criminal defense, elder law and estate planning, immigration, intellectual property, litigation, business law, bankruptcy, tax law, and social security disability. The agency’s research-first orientation, primary data studies, schema and technical SEO depth, and the Sequoia platform together reflect a portfolio that has grown well past traditional agency boundaries.

This ruling follows the previously reported hung jury and mistrial in November 2025. As detailed in Aiello Harris Abate, Law Group PC, Achieves Hung Jury in Federal Tax-Fraud Trial of New Jersey CPA, defense attorneys James A. Abate and Jay J. Freireich of Aiello Harris Abate Law Group PC secured the hung-jury outcome after deliberations were unable to reach a unanimous verdict. At that time, the Honorable Zahid N. Quraishi, U.S.D.J.  reserved decision on a pending motion for acquittal.

In a detailed written Opinion and Order issued on February 13, 2026, the Court determined that the Government failed to present sufficient evidence from which a rational jury could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Applying the standard under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 29, the Court concluded that the evidence did not establish that Mr. Demba willfully violated a known legal duty — a required element in criminal tax prosecutions.

The tax fraud case involved Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) credit calculations, an area the Court recognized as particularly complex within federal tax law. The Opinion emphasized that inaccuracies alone are insufficient to prove criminal intent and that the Government failed to negate Mr. Demba’s good-faith belief regarding the methodology used.

The Court further found insufficient evidence to support the obstruction charge, concluding that the record did not establish corrupt intent beyond a reasonable doubt. The Judgment of Acquittal prevents retrial under double jeopardy principles and brings the matter to a final resolution.

Aiello Harris Abate Law Group PC, which represents clients in complex criminal defense matters including Federal and New Jersey tax fraud cases, successfully defended Mr. Demba throughout the proceedings, led by James A. Abate and Jay J. Freireich.

CASE INFORMATION

United States District Court – District Of New Jersey – Trenton, NJ
United States of America v. Christopher Ward Demba
Case No. 3:25-cr-00032-ZNQ

CLM ran the study through its proprietary CLM Sequoia platform, pulling the top 5 organic Google results for 28 legal keywords across 24 major U.S. cities in February of 2026. Each law firm page in the dataset was then fed through Winston AI, which scored every page for AI-generated content percentage. CLM also captured word count and readability scores for each URL. When the dust settled, the working dataset covered 2,435 law firm ranking appearances, 1,618 unique URLs, and 1,021 unique domains across 8 practice areas including personal injury, criminal defense, family law, estate planning, business law, workers’ compensation, medical malpractice, and employment law.

The headline finding? AI content percentage and organic ranking position have no statistically significant connection. The Spearman correlation came back at r = 0.065 with a p-value of 0.138, which lands well above the 0.05 cutoff that would indicate a real relationship.

“For the past two years, the loudest conversation in legal marketing has been whether AI content helps or hurts your Google rankings,” said Jason Bland, Co-Founder and CEO of Custom Legal Marketing. “We went out and measured it across more than 2,400 ranking appearances. The answer turned out to be neither. You are not going to leapfrog your competitors by publishing AI content, and you are not going to get slapped for it either. The algorithm just does not care.”

Key Findings on AI Content and Law Firm Rankings

AI content shows up on nearly every ranking law firm page, but the way it distributes is striking. Roughly 54.7% of ranking pages have 5% or less AI-detected content. On the other end, 21.4% clock in at 70% or higher. What is missing is the middle. Fewer than one in four pages land in the 6 to 69% range. Rather than a gradual shift toward AI adoption, the industry appears to be splitting into two distinct camps: firms that barely use it and firms that use it for almost everything.

Of all the practice areas CLM studied, personal injury has the most AI content by a wide margin. The median AI detection for PI pages sits at 14%, which is roughly five times the 3% median across all practice areas. Not a single personal injury law firm page in the top 5 results came back clean. Every one of them had some detectable AI content. Criminal defense, on the other hand, looks completely different. Eighty-seven percent of pages ranking at Position 1 for criminal defense keywords had less than 10% AI, making it the most human-written category in the study.

The data points toward a blended workflow as the strongest approach. Pages landing in the 26 to 50% AI range, which likely reflects content where a writer used AI for drafting or research and then did heavy editing, posted the best average ranking position at 2.83 and the highest average word count at 2,958 words. Meanwhile, pages at the 71 to 100% AI level averaged only 1,561 words and ranked a bit worse at an average position of 3.23.

There is also a readability problem that firms using AI heavily need to know about. CLM found a correlation of r = -0.233 (p < 0.0001) between AI percentage and readability score. Put simply, the more AI on the page, the harder it is to read. That matters on its own, but it also matters because word count (r = -0.089, p = 0.042) turned out to have a stronger statistical tie to rankings than AI percentage did. Firms pumping out AI content without editing it down may be quietly undermining their own performance through readability issues they have never measured.

Where a firm is located also plays a role in how much AI content surrounds it in the search results. Columbus, OH came in as the biggest outlier at 59% mean AI content and a 76% median, most likely because national firms dominate the rankings there. On the low end, San Antonio (16.9%), Jacksonville (18.3%), and Houston (19.3%) had the least AI content, reflecting markets where regional and local firms still rely on traditionally written pages.

Study Methodology

CLM built the study inside Sequoia’s Research Tool, which runs regular studies to train its AI marketing platform.

The team executed all 672 keyword-city queries on mobile, matching how Google indexes and ranks pages under its mobile-first approach. Pages were scraped using a headless browser with an HTTP fallback for pages that resisted rendering. Winston AI handled the detection side, returning a percentage score for each page, estimating how much of the content appeared to be machine-generated. All told, CLM processed 1,889,828 words across the full law firm dataset. Of those, 615,934 words (32.6%) came back flagged as AI-generated.

The 24 cities in the study span the country: New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston, Phoenix, Philadelphia, San Antonio, San Diego, Dallas, San Jose, Austin, Jacksonville, Fort Worth, Columbus, Charlotte, San Francisco, Indianapolis, Seattle, Denver, Boston, Nashville, El Paso, Detroit, and Oklahoma City.

Implications for Law Firms

Bland was blunt about what the findings should mean for how firms spend their marketing dollars. “What gets you from Position 5 to Position 1 in competitive legal markets has not changed. It is still domain authority, content that actually says something, pages people can read without a headache, strong E-E-A-T signals, and solid local SEO. AI content does not appear anywhere on that list. If a firm is pouring money into AI content production but ignoring editorial quality and link building, they are focused on the wrong thing.”

One other number stood out: 18.2% of Position 1 results for personal injury keywords came from pages with 70%+ AI content. But those pages belong to a handful of firms with enormous authority behind them, which strongly suggests it is the domain strength doing the work, not the AI-generated copy.

The study analyzed 1,750 search engine results pages across 50 of the largest U.S. metropolitan markets, covering 11 high-volume personal injury keywords spanning three practice areas: general personal injury, motor vehicle accidents, and premises liability. Researchers captured the top five organic results for each of 350 keyword-city combinations, then measured each ranking URL against the Google PageSpeed Insights API. In total, 1,328 unique URLs from 653 distinct domains were evaluated across eight performance metrics including PageSpeed Performance Score, Largest Contentful Paint (LCP), First Contentful Paint (FCP), Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS), Total Blocking Time, Speed Index, mobile-friendliness, and HTTPS status.

The headline finding was a Pearson correlation coefficient of -0.0705 between PageSpeed performance scores and ranking position. To put that in perspective, the famously absurd correlation between Nicolas Cage film releases and swimming pool drownings is nearly ten times stronger. In practical terms, -0.0705 rounds to what it is: zero.

Nearly 65% of Top Ranking Law Firm Sites Fail Core Web Vitals

Among the study’s most striking findings was the performance of pages that hold the number one ranking position. Of the 340 pages occupying Position 1 across all searches, 64.7 percent received a “Poor” grade on Google’s own Largest Contentful Paint metric, meaning their primary content took longer than four seconds to render. Only 14.7 percent of Position 1 results met Google’s “Good” threshold of under 2.5 seconds for LCP.

The average PageSpeed score across all 1,750 top-five results was 64.9 out of 100, falling squarely within what Google classifies as the “Needs Improvement” range. The difference in average score between Position 1 (66.6) and Position 5 (64.1) was just 2.5 points on a 100-point scale.

Individual cases further illustrated the disconnect. One law firm page scored a perfect 100 on PageSpeed and ranked at Position 5 for its keyword, while a page scoring 28 held the Position 1 spot for a comparable keyword in a different market. The 72-point gap and nearly 11-fold difference in load time between the two pages did not translate into any ranking advantage for the faster site.

When CLM examined performance distributions by keyword, no consistent pattern emerged across the seven primary search terms analyzed. For car accident-related keywords, Position 1 results did show higher average scores than Position 5, but for medical malpractice keywords, the pattern was reversed. For slip and fall searches, the variation across all five positions fell within a 4.1-point range, suggesting random noise rather than a systematic relationship.

The study’s methodology was designed to isolate the relationship between speed and rankings within a single competitive vertical, eliminating the cross-industry noise that can confound broader studies. All data was collected in February of 2026, using live Google searches with geographic targeting to simulate local search behavior.

Custom Legal Marketing published the full study, including detailed breakdowns by keyword, city, domain type, and individual Core Web Vitals, through CLM Sequoia, its research and marketing intelligence platform built exclusively for the legal industry.

You can read the full report on Does Page Speed Matter for Law Firm SEO in Custom Legal Marketing’s knowledge bank.

While organizational and internal infrastructure upgrades came first, the software that makes that mission possible is, as of today, no longer a secret. At least the name isn’t.

Introducing CLM Sequoia, the AI-powered marketing platform built entirely by Custom Legal Marketing. CLM Sequoia isn’t finished, and it never will be. Like its namesake, the platform is built to never stop growing, for law firms that never want to stop growing.

CLM has been deploying components of Sequoia into law firm websites over the last year and, before that, reworking internal processes around the technology. The plugins, AI agents, research tools, and SEO and Answer Engine Optimization capabilities are already running. And law firms are already seeing Sequoia boost leads and cases, especially through its answer engine optimization features. Select clients already have some components running on their websites and woven into their account management processes.

Throughout 2026, every department, every account, and every internal operation at Custom Legal Marketing will be fully integrated into CLM Sequoia’s central platform. Some clients have already seen rapid deployment of purpose-built solutions through Sequoia, and every new tool that solves an individual problem gets absorbed into the main codebase, making the entire platform stronger.

From Legal Marketing Agency to Platform

In January, Custom Legal Marketing turned 21. The company was founded in 2005 by Jason Bland and Chris Kazor. For years, CLM did what good legal marketing firms do: building websites, writing content, earning links, and driving leads to law firms through Google Search, Google Maps, Google Ads, and all the usual channels.

But the world is changing. Law firms are changing. And here’s the thing nobody in the SEO industry likes to talk about: every marketing agency is buying the same data. When everyone has access to the same tools, nobody has a competitive advantage.

“I hate shopping and I love building,” said Bland. It’s a trait that shows up in every corner of his life.

The company has never been shy about building in-house. CLM has developed custom solutions and applications for years to solve problems, improve client experiences, analyze data, and streamline internal processes. But Bland found himself still wasting time shopping for the right tools from other vendors; tools that were available to every competitor at the same time.

The decision to stop shopping and start building a unified platform was inevitable.

CLM is not licensing someone else’s software and putting a logo on it. Not waiting for a vendor to ship a feature that might solve tomorrow’s problem for CLM and every other agency plugged into the same system. It’s building its own solutions, for every operation, from the ground up.

The result is Sequoia. The platform combines over two decades of legal marketing experience with AI processing power, research tools that analyze the results of in-house studies, and automation. It lets AI do what it does best while letting CLM’s team do what they do best. One single intelligence layer across every client engagement.

Law Firm Marketing Directors Don’t Need Vendor Migration Headaches

Law firms don’t want migration headaches. Marketing directors don’t want to rip out every vendor when they switch agencies. Sequoia was designed with that in mind. The platform works with the applications a law firm already uses and supercharges their marketing from there.

CLM now controls its own roadmap and offers tools and insights that are exclusive to the law firms that partner with it. When the industry shifts, CLM doesn’t wait; they build the solution and deploy it.

“You only get into search marketing if you love constant change,” said Bland. “That’s why CLM Sequoia is so exciting. It’s not finished and never will be. It’s always growing.”

For more information about CLM Sequoia, visit https://custom.legal/sequoia.

The Winter 2026 session, titled “Good Business Practices & Preventing Problem Employees,” will take place on Thursday, March 26, from 5:15 p.m. to 7:15 p.m. at the Massachusetts School of Law, Room 204. Food will be provided.

The night will begin with welcoming remarks by Michael L. Coyne, Dean of Massachusetts School of Law, and continue with instruction from a team of MSLAW business and legal experts. Topics will include:

• Establishing Systems for Documenting Performance and Discipline (Michael Leamy – Professor of Business)
• Harassment, Bullying, Violence, and OSHA’s General Duty Clause (Paula Colby-Clements – Professor of Law)
• Piercing The Corporate Veil (Joseph Devlin, Professor of Law)
• Agent Liability on Instruments (Amy Dimitriadis – Professor of Law)
• Mental Health Issues in the Workplace (Shane Rodriguez – Professor of Law)

The Winter 2026 session will be the 6th installment in The Cummings Business Law Seminar Series in partnership with MSLAW to educate the public on the interplay between business and law.

The event is free and open to the public, but registration is required. Prospective attendees can scan the QR Code below to sign up, or RSVP directly to Diane Sullivan at dianes@mslaw.edu.

The company, founded in January 2005 under parent company Adviatech, began at a time when Google was one of several major search engines, social media platforms had little relevance to law firms and smartphones had yet to reshape daily life. Its anniversary arrives as artificial intelligence tools and answer engines alter how people find lawyers and evaluate law firms online.

Over the past two decades, Custom Legal Marketing has helped move the legal industry through the gradual transition from static brochure websites to integrated digital strategies that fold in search engine visibility, content, local search, email outreach and video.

The shift towards AI chatbots may have been unexpected for some, but CLM started developing AI-focused strategies years before ChatGPT was shared with the public. CLM has invested in an AI-powered marketing platform that has supercharged the way their team gets results for law firms. The system is built entirely in-house and has been getting integrated into the various departments within CLM. After nearly 4 years of secrecy, CLM plans to announce the platform publicly later this year.

Custom Legal Marketing’s evolution has been driven as much by experimentation as by process. Designers, writers and developers work together on campaigns that often blend long-form explainers, visual storytelling and search-focused content, with the goal of making complex legal issues accessible without sacrificing accuracy. More recently, the company’s homegrown AI platform has become a quiet engine behind many of those efforts, surfacing patterns in search trends, user behavior and local competition that inform creative choices rather than replace them.

That mix of creativity and data has led to work that stands out in a crowded field. Custom Legal Marketing’s projects have included award-winning commercial production and web campaigns that helped small firms expand into regional practices. Many clients have remained with the agency through multiple redesigns and market shifts, citing a willingness to test new ideas while staying candid about what is and is not working.

“Our culture has always been about creative thinking and not just chasing Google’s latest move,” co-founder Jason Bland said. “Our team members having the freedom to experiment is one of the reasons we’re so far ahead of the curve on AI marketing.”

The investment fraud and class action law firm won this year’s title for demonstrating a long-term dedication to its clients. It is known for taking on important national cases and creating a workplace that helps employees grow while focusing on excellent client service. 

Following the 2024 winner, Chaffin Luhana LLP, Meyer Wilson Werning now joins a highly respected list of firms praised for their innovation and consistent top performance.

CrispX evaluates nominees across several measures of organizational strength, including leadership clarity, operational discipline, and the capacity to grow without compromising client service. 

Meyer Wilson Werning’s approach reflects more than 25 years of experience advocating for investors harmed by financial adviser misconduct and through the pursuit of consumer class actions. Their team structure, national casework, and low-volume/high-value model align closely with the criteria the CrispX program highlights.

The award also recognizes the firm’s efforts in planning for the future and improving its systems. Meyer Wilson Werning invests significant resources into upgrading technology, internal processes, and workflow setups. 

These improvements help the firm manage large value and high-impact investor claims, including FINRA arbitration matters and other adviser-misconduct cases. Their lawyers work on cases like misleading or high-risk investment advice, breach of fiduciary duty, poor supervision, high-risk private offerings, and other financial adviser-related issues.

Firm culture played a meaningful role in this year’s selection. CrispX focuses on groups that improve their field using mentorship, teaching, and public involvement.

On July 24, 2025, District Court Judge Don Jesse Toussaint denied a motion to exclude the testimony of expert witness, Michael Arrigo, an authority on medical billing and healthcare economics, in the matter of Brent Nelson and Kara Merritts v. Benyam Chebud, TIPS, Inc. d/b/a Domino’s Pizza & Domino’s Pizza, LLC (Case No: 2024CV30949). The ruling, which cited the Colorado Rules of Evidence 702 and referenced People v. Shreck, allows Arrigo to provide analysis on the usual, customary and reasonable (UCR) charges for the plaintiff’s medical care based on various standardized coding systems.

Court documents indicate Arrigo’s testimony will address the appropriateness of the plaintiff’s medical bills using methodologies that compare Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes, Diagnosis Related Groupings (DRGs), Resource Utilization Groups (RUGs), and Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes. His analysis, as described in pleadings, also includes comparing charges for hospital stays and episodes of care using DRG algorithms, reviewing inpatient and skilled nursing facility (SNF) charges, and examining billing practices without factoring in collateral sources such as insurance payments.

Judge Toussaint’s order specifically noted that Arrigo’s opinion would extend to rebutting the methods used by the opposing party’s expert, particularly concerning the reliability of DRG determinations and the billing practices of SNFs. According to the order, Arrigo’s assessment incorporates a review of patient clinical documentation, physician certifications, and the unique characteristics involved in hospital and SNF billing, including the Minimum Data Set (MDS) used to determine RUG scores for patient care classification.

The court’s decision was reached after considering a motion in limine by the defense to exclude Arrigo’s testimony. The court denied the motion, finding that Arrigo’s qualifications and methodologies satisfied Colorado’s standards for expert witness admissibility. Under CRE 702, courts are charged with ensuring expert testimony is both relevant and the product of reliable principles and methods. In referencing the Colorado Supreme Court decision in People v. Shreck, the court underscored its gatekeeping role, concluding that Arrigo’s testimony met these requirements.

The case, currently proceeding in Arapahoe County, involves allegations concerning the reasonableness of medical expenses incurred following a personal injury incident. The dispute over the admissibility of expert medical billing testimony is notable, as similar issues have arisen in courts nationwide amid ongoing debates about the assessment and substantiation of medical charges in tort litigation.

As the litigation advances, Judge Toussaint’s ruling is expected to serve as a reference point for attorneys and insurers handling cases involving complex medical billing and coding matters. The trial date and subsequent proceedings in Nelson and Merritts v. Chebud et al. will be closely monitored by observers in the legal and healthcare fields.

CASE INFORMATION AND RULING
Motion in Limine to exclude testimony DENIED under CRE 702, the Colorado state standard for determining the admissibility of expert witness testimony, including scientific evidence. (People v. Shreck); ruling of Don Jesse Toussaint, District Court Judge, July 24, 2025. Brent Nelson and Kara Merritts v. Benyam Chebud, TIPS, Inc. d/b/a Dominoes Pizza & Dominoes Pizza, LLC, Case No: 2024CV30949 District Court, Arapahoe County, Colorado.

No World Borders are national experts in healthcare data, regulations and economics. Their team understands the borders between health data and how to unify data quality for actionable views. To find out more about Medicare LCD or to contact an Electronic Health Record and E.H.R. Certification Standards Expert Witness, Expert Witness on Medicare Fraud, Physician Compensation Expert, or HIPAA Privacy Expert Witness contact No World Borders.

The Fall 2025 session, titled “Good Business Practices & Preventing Problem Employees,” will take place on Tuesday, November 12, from 5:15 p.m. to 7:15 p.m. at the Massachusetts School of Law, Room 204. Sandwiches will be provided.

This free two-part seminar series brings together expert faculty from MSLAW to explore the most pressing issues employers face — from employee management and theft prevention to shielding small businesses from lawsuits.

Seminar Part I Topics (November 12):

• Effective Management and Operational Strategies – Michael Leamy, Professor of Business
• Shielding Your Small Business from Lawsuits – Paula Colby-Clements, Professor of Law
• How to Draft Totally Awesome Severance Agreements – Joseph Devlin, Professor of Law
• Monitoring Your Own Employees – Amy Dimitriadis, Professor of Law
• Employee Theft – Shane Rodriguez, Professor of Law

Part II (March 26, 2026) will continue the series, addressing advanced topics such as documenting performance, harassment and OSHA compliance, corporate veil issues, and remote worker liability.

Opening remarks will be given by Michael L. Coyne, President and Dean of the Massachusetts School of Law, who emphasized the importance of practical education for business owners:

“Our goal is to make the law accessible — empowering business leaders to make informed, confident decisions that strengthen their companies and protect their employees.”

The event is free and open to the public, to register attendees can scan the QR code below.

Lisa Stoia has directed and transformed complex organizations for more than a decade. Most recently, she served as Managing Director of Ronco Technical Services, a biomedical equipment maintenance company serving healthcare facilities, universities, laboratories, and veterinary practices. She stepped into an existing business, reimagined its operational framework, rebuilt and scaled it, and ultimately oversaw its sale. Under her leadership, Ronco achieved 40% revenue growth, 20% profit margin increase, and a 30% improvement in operational efficiency while securing major client contracts with Cornell, MSKCC, the Animal Medical Center of NY, and the Bronx Zoo. 

Her career also includes roles at Bank of America, Elsevier, AT&T Capital, and Commercial Trust (now Bank of America). She has consistently delivered transformative results in P&L management, contract negotiation, risk management, and cross-functional leadership.  

Lisa’s accomplishments include obtaining MWBE certification from the State of New Jersey, maintaining A+ BBB and Google 5-star ratings, and being featured in Marie Brenner’s book The Desperate Hours: One Hospital’s Fight to Save a City on the Pandemic’s Front Lines. She has also developed and delivered continuing education programs certified within the veterinary arena. 

She holds a Bachelor of Arts in Economics and Art History from Rutgers University. In addition to her corporate leadership, Lisa has dedicated time to community service, including serving as an Interim Crisis Coordinator and now, as an Advocate with SAFE in Hunterdon, supporting survivors of domestic and sexual abuse. Through her role as Firm Administrator of Horton Legal Strategies, Lisa is committed to strengthening the firm’s infrastructure, streamlining workflows, and ensuring sustainable growth for the firm’s clients and team. 

Please join us in welcoming this outstanding leader to Horton Legal Strategies! 

The write-up, which includes an interview with Innovators’ Journey representative, Nick Franck, allows Werning to go into detail about the motivation that drives her to stand for investors as well as her work establishing Meyer Wilson Werning’s cryptocurrency litigation team.

Werning began working with Meyer Wilson Werning in 2011. She worked as a law clerk alongside the founding Principal, David Meyer. 

In Jones’ breakdown, he highlights the motivation that brought Werning to the firm – a desire to help victims overcome some of the most heartbreaking times of their lives.

Werning notes that financial setbacks, including those brought about by scams, affect more than a person’s financial portfolio. These losses can also devastate a person’s plans for the future, as well as their ability to care for themselves or the people who rely on them.

When it comes to cryptocurrency, Werning’s interview with Franck allows her to discuss the duality between her enthusiasm for the new financial medium and her concerns about the industry’s commitment to user safety. 

She notes that any institution that wants to move cryptocurrency into the mainstream must be “safe, secure, and dependable,” and that Meyer Wilson Werning is fighting to ensure that cryptocurrency and its mediators are held to the same standards of security and accountability as other financial giants.

Werning’s efforts have put $4 million back into the hands of victims of a “pig butchering” scam. She’s also in the process of advocating for victims of the recent Coinbase scams. Coinbase, she notes, admitted that internal personnel sold its users’ data to scammers and promised paybacks to parties impacted by the data breach, but it has yet to follow through with that promise.

Werning’s work has also seen her push back against another global cryptocurrency exchange’s improper margin liquidations, a process that saw her represent 18 international investors as the case settled. 

When asked about the ways users can interact more safely with cryptocurrency platforms and what victims of scams can do, Werning notes that users are rarely the agents of their own financial losses. She invites anyone impacted by recent cryptocurrency fraud to reach out to Meyer Wilson Werning and its cryptocurrency litigation team for help holding investment giants accountable for their security breaches.

Meyer Wilson Werning and its team are proud of Werning’s achievements and look forward to watching her star rise as she continues to shape the future of cryptocurrency oversight.

The Goldman Sachs 10,000 Small Businesses (10KSB) program is a highly selective initiative that equips entrepreneurs with practical business education, access to capital, and comprehensive business support services. Through an intensive curriculum designed in partnership with Babson College, the nation’s top-ranked school for entrepreneurship, participants gain world-class training to accelerate growth and create jobs in their communities.

From September through December 2025, Ms. Horton will join business leaders from across the region in a rigorous series of courses and advising sessions covering leadership, finance, operations, and strategic growth planning. The program culminates in a Ceremony of Success on December 11, 2025.

“This is an incredible honor,” said Lenore Horton, CEO of Horton Legal Strategies. “At HLS, we believe legal strategy should be a catalyst for growth not just a cost of doing business. Participating in Goldman Sachs 10,000 Small Businesses allows us to sharpen our own strategies while deepening the ways we help our clients protect, manage, and expand their businesses.”

About Goldman Sachs 10,000 Small Businesses

Goldman Sachs 10,000 Small Businesses is a $750 million national program that helps business owners grow and create jobs by providing them with greater access to education, capital, and support services. To date, more than 16,000 business owners across all 50 states, Puerto Rico, and Washington, D.C. have participated in the program, driving measurable impact. How measurable? Within six months of completion, 66% of graduates increased their revenues and 44% created new jobs.

Jessica L. Villar focuses her practice on nonprofit law, estate planning, and business and corporate transactional matters. She began her legal career in 2017 as an entertainment attorney specializing in music law, later expanding her expertise into broader areas of business and corporate law. Jessica holds a degree in International Business and Marketing from Cal Poly Pomona and earned her J.D. from Southwestern Law School. Her background in both entertainment and corporate law offers clients a unique and valuable perspective.

Nicole M. Threlkel brings over a decade of experience in business and real estate law, with a strong background in both litigation and transactional matters. She began her legal career in 2010, representing financial institutions and has since built a diverse practice advising individuals, businesses, both for-profit and nonprofit, and homeowners’ associations on a wide range of legal needs.  Nicole received her B.A. from UCLA in Political Science and her J.D. from Chapman University School of Law. Her work in appellate law has garnered national recognition, underscoring her commitment to her practice.

Jessica and Nicole’s diverse backgrounds allow them to offer clients practical, forward-thinking legal solutions tailored to their unique needs.

The firm proudly welcomes Jessica and Nicole to the partnership and celebrates their continued leadership, legal excellence, and dedication to client success.

This episode is a must-watch for federal employees who feel unsupported, misinformed, or overwhelmed when navigating disability-related employment issues. Pines and Massey take a deep dive into key topics such as reasonable accommodations, the disability retirement process, and the legal rights of disabled federal workers. With years of experience advocating for public servants, Eric Pines breaks down essential information in clear, actionable terms.

Key talking points from the interview include:

• What qualifies as a disability under federal law: The conversation starts with a clear definition of what constitutes a qualifying disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and relevant federal guidelines.
• How reasonable accommodations work — and what to do if they fail: Pines explains how to request accommodations, what agencies are legally obligated to provide, and how employees can respond if those accommodations are denied or ineffective.
• Understanding the disability retirement application process: The episode outlines eligibility criteria for OPM disability retirement, step-by-step guidance on filing, and the documentation needed for approval.
• Differentiating disability retirement, Social Security Disability, and workers’ compensation: Pines clarifies the differences between these benefit systems and when each may apply, offering crucial advice on how to pursue multiple options if eligible.
• How long the process takes and what to expect: Viewers gain realistic timelines and insights into common roadblocks, and how legal support can help overcome them.
• Financial benefits of disability retirement: The discussion covers vital financial information, including ongoing health insurance, pension eligibility, and potential Social Security offsets.
• Job offers at lower grades — and what to consider: The hosts offer a strategic look at how to evaluate offers for lower-level positions and how these offers can affect disability retirement claims.
• The value of legal support: Pines emphasizes the importance of working with an experienced attorney, especially when navigating appeals, documentation, or agency pushback. His firm provides personalized guidance to ensure employees receive the benefits they’ve earned.

“Disability retirement is one of the most valuable but underutilized tools available to federal employees,” says Eric Pines. “Too many workers don’t realize there are options to secure both their health and financial future.”

This episode isn’t just an informative discussion, it’s a call to action. Federal employees who are struggling don’t have to do it alone. With legal insight and union support, they can reclaim their rights and protect their future.

Watch the full episode now and empower yourself with the knowledge and tools to make informed decisions about your career and health.

The new partners in the 2025 Partnership Class are:

• Daniel J. Cohen
• Kenneth A. Davis
• Jean B. Grevers
• Andrew M. Hutcher
• Wabi Jain
• Svetlana Lovejoy
• Roy A. Shulman
• Shari Siegel

“These attorneys exemplify the excellence, client dedication, and collaborative spirit that define our firm,” said Suzie Scanlon Rabinowitz, Managing Partner at SRD Legal Group. “Their promotions are a testament to their leadership, legal acumen, and the value they bring to our clients and our culture.”

As a fully virtual law firm, SRD continues to attract top-tier legal talent from across the country. With a commitment to truly flexible work, cutting-edge technology, and a client-first approach, the firm has built a reputation for forward-thinking legal solutions and a thriving remote workplace.

The firm serves as a strategic partner to its corporate clients, operating as an extension of their in-house legal departments and offering both fully and partially outsourced legal solutions. This model provides flexible, scalable support tailored to each client’s unique needs and business objectives. The newly named partners will continue to serve clients in key corporate practice areas—including vendor contracts, confidentiality agreements, technology law, privacy and data protection, ISDA documentation and trading agreements, mergers & acquisitions, private equity and investment management and real estate transactions—while also stepping into expanded leadership roles within the firm.

ECFX Track revolutionizes legal workflows by eliminating the need for manual court website searches, automatically tracking cases across thousands of courts in over 40 states. The solution provides timely, reliable notifications with attached court documents sent directly to the ECFX inbox, while ensuring all filings are securely stored and organized within a firm’s preferred Document Management System (DMS) using firm-defined naming conventions.

“As legal teams continue to seek more efficient solutions, ECFX Track represents a significant advancement in case monitoring technology,” said Dan O’Day, CEO and Co-Founder of ECFX. “These additional Am Law 50 firms joining our platform demonstrate the growing demand for automation that reduces administrative burden and enhances risk management.”

ECFX Track offers fully customizable notifications, allowing firms to tailor alerts to their specific workflow requirements. This ensures that key stakeholders receive critical case updates without unnecessary manual intervention. Moreover, the secure, anonymous tracking mechanism protects firm interests by enabling case monitoring without revealing their involvement.

ECFX continues to expand its footprint among the nation’s top law firms, delivering automation solutions that not only streamline workflows but also significantly reduce operational risks and enhance visibility into case activity.

For more information about ECFX Track, visit goecfx.com/product-ecfx-track or contact sales@goecfx.com.

This fully updated edition explores how to navigate the modern marketing landscape, covering everything from podcasting and social media to AI-driven tools. It offers legal and strategic guidance drawn from years of experience working with inventors and startups.

Gearhart Law is nationally recognized for its work with startups, inventors, and entrepreneurs, providing legal services that support innovation from concept to commercialization. Postolski draws from this background to deliver a marketing guide that goes beyond tactics, offering insights into aligning your promotional efforts with your intellectual property for maximum impact.

Key highlights of the Fourth Edition include:

• Using AI to sharpen your messaging and reach
• Leveraging podcasts, videos, and social media for brand growth
• Firsthand advice from industry experts across marketing, business, and law
• Strategies for integrating IP protection with your go-to-market plan
• Legal and ethical considerations in today’s digital-first marketing world

Additionally, the chapter on podcasting was written by Richard and Elizabeth Gearhart, of Gearhart Law and hosts of the popular podcast Passage to Profit, where they spotlight entrepreneurs and share marketing insights. Their contribution highlights how podcasting can serve as a powerful platform for visibility, credibility, and audience engagement. 

Whether you’re launching your first product or looking to scale your brand, Marketing Your Invention, Product, or Journey is the go-to guide for marketing success in the modern age. Check it out on the ABA website.