According to the filing, the Plaintiff reported inappropriate conduct from a male volleyball coach with the The Latin School of Chicago with female volleyball players to her supervisor, in an effort to protect young female students. The lawsuit alleges that at no point did the leadership at The Latin School of Chicago express any concerns for the female volleyball players. However, The Latin School of Chicago and its administration ignored these reports, allowing the conduct to continue.

The Complaint also further alleges that Plaintiff was discriminated against by coaches in The Latin School of Chicago’s athletics department by being marginalized, ignored and dismissed.  The Complaint alleges that the head coach of the volleyball team ensured that he only worked with male coaches at  The Latin School of Chicago by ignoring any improper behavior by male coaches, conspiring with another male coach to manufacture a complaint about the Plaintiff, all to facilitate the wrongful termination of the Plaintiff.

“This complaint describes a continued pattern of failed leadership and institutional misconduct at The Latin School of Chicago. The safety and well-being of students must always come first” said  Justin DeLuca, counsel for the Plaintiff and attorney at Ellis Legal P.C “However, The Latin School of Chicago’s reputation is more important than the safety and protection of students and the only way to  do that is to silence those who speak out about the pattern of abuse, discrimination, and toxic environment at The Latin School of Chicago.”

The defendants have not yet filed a response to the lawsuit. All allegations described in the complaint are claims made by the plaintiff and have not been adjudicated by the Court.

The firm, which focuses exclusively on personal injury law, works with clients injured in car accidents, tractor-trailer accidents, commercial vehicle accidents, and other serious accidents across Texas. With personal injury law shifting rapidly, the firm has structured its practice to remain current on the specific legal developments that directly affect case outcomes.

“Our clients are more than case numbers,” said George Salinas, trial lawyer and founder, who has provided legal service to the area for 20 years. “They are human beings who have had something unjustly taken from them. We are here to make sure their voices are heard and their lives are restored.”

The 15-year-old firm is drawing attention to a gap many injury victims discover too late: when an individual goes up against a large insurer or corporation, the opposing side often arrives with significant financial and legal resources already in motion. George Salinas Injury Lawyers was built to close that gap, bringing focused legal knowledge and trial experience to cases where the stakes are highest.

A key part of the firm’s approach is direct attorney access throughout the legal process. Clients are kept informed on the progress of their case and are never left without answers during a stressful and often lengthy process.

The firm has received recognition from multiple legal rating services, recognition the firm says reflects client outcomes above all else. Holding responsible parties accountable through the civil justice system remains the driving force behind its work.

Injured San Antonio residents can contact George Salinas Injury Lawyers to discuss their case and legal options.

The audit found that “Testimonials” remains the most common social proof label across law firm websites, outranking “Reviews” by 32%. Across the dataset, 35% of firms publish a Testimonials nav page compared to 27% publishing a Reviews page. Google Trends data for 2025 showed the consumer search terms “lawyer reviews” and “law firm reviews” generating steady search interest throughout the year, while “lawyer testimonials” and “law firm testimonials” registered zero measurable interest for every week of the year.

The disconnect extends beyond navigation labels to URL structure. The full report on testimonials vs reviews found that 2,350 law firm domains route their social proof page through a “/testimonials/” URL path, while only 1,516 use a “/reviews/” path. Even among firms that updated their nav label to “Reviews” or “Client Reviews,” many left the underlying URL unchanged, leaving the indexed page address tied to the term consumers do not search for.

In a finding that captures the transition in motion, 563 firms in the audit publish both a “Testimonials” and a “Reviews” item in their main navigation as separate menu entries. More than half of those firms, 304 in total, point both menu items to the exact same URL.

Personal injury showed the widest gap between consumer language and on-site language, with 54.8% of personal injury firms publishing a Testimonials nav page compared to 27.6% publishing a Reviews page. Business law was the only practice area in the audit where Reviews appeared more frequently than Testimonials.

The full study, including methodology, practice area breakdowns, and a four-step migration sequence for firms changing from Testimonials to Reviews, is available on Custom Legal Marketing’s website.

CASA of Travis County empowers trained volunteers to advocate for children’s safety, well-being and long-term stability in court and in the community. The organization works toward its vision of providing quality advocacy, a safe home and a promising future for every child in Travis County. 

Kimbrough, a Texas attorney whose firm focuses on divorce and family law matters, will support CASA’s mission through board service, community engagement and advocacy for children and families navigating complex legal and personal challenges.

“CASA’s work matters because every child deserves someone who will show up, listen closely and speak up for what they need,” Kimbrough said. “I am honored to serve on the board and support an organization that helps children move toward a stronger future.”

In 2025, CASA of Travis County served 982 children with the support of 560 assigned volunteers. CASA reported that 96% of its recommendations were ordered by a judge or negotiated or agreed upon before a hearing.

CASA of Travis County has served the community for more than 40 years. In 2022, the organization reached its long-standing goal of accepting all case assignments from the court and is now appointed automatically to all newly filed child abuse or neglect cases in Travis County.

Through Kimbrough Family Law, Kimbrough has built a practice focused on legal strategy, clear client communication and advocacy for families facing major transitions. Her work with custody, parental rights and child-related legal issues gives her a direct connection to CASA’s mission and the needs of children whose lives intersect with the court system. 

CASA of Travis County continues to seek new volunteers, with a current need for bilingual volunteers. Individuals interested in volunteering can visit www.casatravis.org/volunteer or RSVP for an information session at www.casatravis.org/infosession. Donations can be made at www.casatravis.org/donate.

William Mattar 2026 Super Lawyers attorneys are:

• Dave Rusin (Super Lawyers® 2012–2026);
• Anthony Tantillo (Super Lawyers® 2012–2026); and
• Sara Wallitt (Rising Stars 2015; Super Lawyers® 2026).

Attorneys named to the Rising Stars list include:

• Brendan Denz (Rising Stars 2023–2026);
• Matthew Kaiser (Rising Stars 2018–2026);
• and Ashley Mitchell (Rising Stars 2022–2026).

“At William Mattar Accident Lawyers, we are proud of our exceptional team of professionals who deliver outstanding client service each and every day,” said William Mattar. “While we see their dedication firsthand, we are especially pleased to have their efforts recognized on a broader stage through this prestigious honor.”

The Super Lawyers® designation is awarded to no more than five percent of attorneys in each state following a rigorous, multi phase selection process that includes peer nominations, independent research, and evaluation across key indicators of professional excellence. The Rising Stars designation recognizes top up-and-coming attorneys who are under 40 or have been practicing for 10 years or less, with only 2.5 percent of eligible attorneys selected.

The Super Lawyers® lists are published nationwide in Super Lawyers® Magazines and in leading city and regional magazines and newspapers across the country. Super Lawyers® Magazines also feature editorial profiles of attorneys who embody excellence in the practice of law. For more information about Super Lawyers®, visit SuperLawyers.com.

An experienced litigator within GGL Injury Lawyer’s Central Jersey team, Attorney Guage-Zachary was appointed by fellow committee members to champion transparency, manage crucial operations, and support regulatory and legislative updates affecting injured workers across the state.

The NJSBA Workers’ Compensation Executive Committee serves as a vital bridge within the legal community, uniting practitioners representing both Petitioners (injured employees) and Respondents (employers and insurance carriers). This balanced, bipartisan structure ensures that new procedural changes remain fair, practical, and legally sound. 

“The committee’s work actively shapes how complex litigation moves through the New Jersey courts, particularly as we adapt to evolving legislative developments surrounding remote hearings and medical clearance timelines,” said Guage-Zachary. “I am deeply grateful to my colleagues for trusting me with this leadership role. My focus is to keep our discussions practical and fair for the people who rely on this system every day.”

As a dedicated workers’ compensation lawyer at GGL Injury Lawyers, Guage-Zachary brings extensive courtroom experience to her new board seat. Her practice is intensely focused on complex workers’ compensation litigation, including cases involving severe, life-altering catastrophic injuries.

She has litigated extensively across New Jersey state courts and successfully represented clients in high-stakes appeals before the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey. She is admitted to practice law in New Jersey, New York, and before the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.

Beyond her primary appointment, her professional leadership profile includes active memberships in the Bench/Bar Liaison Subcommittee of the NJSBA and the New Jersey Council on Safety & Health.

Applicants are asked to submit a 500- to 1,000-word essay describing the personal, emotional, and practical impact immigration has had on their lives. Essays should explore the challenges individuals and families may face during the immigration process, such as separation, financial hardship, language barriers, or uncertainty, as well as the resilience required to move forward.

Immigration journeys often involve complex experiences that extend beyond legal procedures and documentation. Many individuals encounter significant obstacles while pursuing stability and opportunity in a new country. Through this scholarship program, Mendoza Law Firm hopes to provide financial support to students while encouraging meaningful reflection on the realities of immigration and the perseverance it often requires.

“Immigration stories are deeply personal and often involve significant hardship, but they also demonstrate incredible resilience,” said a representative of Mendoza Law Firm. “Through this scholarship, we hope to give students the opportunity to share their experiences while supporting their educational goals.”

The scholarship is open to undergraduate students enrolled in or admitted to an accredited college or university who maintain a minimum 3.0 GPA and are authorized to study in the United States. Students from all fields of study are eligible to apply.

After the application deadline, submissions will be reviewed by a scholarship selection committee. Five recipients will be selected to receive the scholarship award, which will be sent directly to the student’s college or university.

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.

The certification is administered by Great Place to Work, the global authority on workplace culture. It is awarded based on results from its Trust Index survey, a confidential, research-backed assessment in which employees evaluate their workplace across five dimensions: credibility, respect, fairness, pride and camaraderie.

To earn certification, at least 70% of employees must report a consistently positive workplace experience. No application or committee review determines the outcome; certification is awarded solely by data.

“You cannot build a firm worth working at by treating your people like a cost to manage,” said Angel Reyes, founder of Angel Reyes & Associates. “If we take care of our people and give them real ownership of their work, they take care of everything else. That has been the operating principle here since day one.”

How Certification Helps Clients

According to Great Place to Work research, employees at certified companies are 93% more likely to look forward to coming to work, and job seekers are 4.5 times more likely to find a great boss at a certified organization.

At Angel Reyes & Associates, firm leadership views that connection between workplace culture and client outcomes as foundational, not incidental.

“Clients come to us on some of the worst days of their lives. We make it our mission to start to turn things around for them right away. That kind of service only happens when your team actually wants to be there and believes in what they’re doing,” said Angel Reyes.

The firm, which has helped more than 70,000 personal injury victims recover more than $1 billion in compensation since its founding in 1993, has built its reputation on elite trial advocacy and a commitment to taking cases to verdict when insurance companies refuse to be reasonable. Firm leadership credits that record to a team that is engaged, supported and motivated to do its best work.

“I know what it looks like when people are just going through the motions. That is not what I see here. To have that reflected back through a certification like this is a reminder that what we’ve built is real. I’m grateful every day that it is,” said Angel Reyes.

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.

The redesign prioritizes the experience of injured clients who are often navigating one of the most difficult periods of their lives. Streamlined navigation, enhanced practice area pages, and a more accessible free consultation request process are among the improvements, each aimed at reducing friction for someone who needs legal guidance quickly and without confusion.

Founded in 1985 by Terry Bryant, the firm has spent four decades representing Texans injured through no fault of their own. Bryant is Board Certified in Personal Injury Trial Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, a distinction that confirms a level of expertise many attorneys never achieve. He is also a former municipal judge who presided over more than 100,000 cases in Spring Valley Village, giving him special insight on the Texas court system.

The new website reflects the breadth of cases the firm handles, including car and truck accidents, workplace accidents, wrongful death, maritime injuries, slip-and-falls, product liability, medical malpractice, dangerous drugs and devices, and more. Each practice area section has been updated to provide visitors with substantive information about their rights and options, rather than requiring them to place a call before understanding the basics of their situation.

Bryant has long held that injured Texans deserve both access and answers. The redesigned website is an extension of that commitment, making the firm’s 40-plus years of experience visible and navigable to anyone who needs it. The firm continues to offer free consultations and operates on a contingency fee basis, meaning clients pay no legal fees unless they obtain a successful recovery. 

For many personal injury and civil litigation firms, mold cases are not rejected because the damages are too small. They are rejected because the path from first call to viable lawsuit is often inefficient, resource-intensive, and difficult to standardize. Client stories may be compelling, but before counsel can make an informed decision, the firm usually must sort through lease issues, landlord notice history, property-condition evidence, symptom patterns, medical treatment, collectability concerns, and the practical question of whether the environmental and medical science can ultimately support the claim.

MCC developed this program to solve that front-end problem. Instead of sending firms raw inquiries or loosely screened intake, the program is structured to deliver vetted mold and habitability opportunities supported by documentation, screening, and a repeatable case-development pathway. The model is intended to help firms spend less time guessing about viability and more time evaluating cases that already have a stronger litigation foundation.

“Most firms are not turning away mold cases because there is no opportunity,” said Ed Mohr, President of Mohr Marketing. “They are turning them away because the intake burden is heavy, the workup is technical, and too much time gets burned before anyone knows whether the file is truly worth pursuing. This program was built to reduce that drag and give firms a more practical way to enter or expand in this category.”

At the center of the program is a screening and development structure designed specifically for mold and habitability litigation. Serious leads are screened through a 23-point vetting system and informed by an extensive intake framework that evaluates environmental warning signs, medical symptom patterns, landlord or property-owner notice history, liability facts, damages, and defendant collectability before a matter is delivered to counsel. The objective is not simply to generate interest, but to improve the quality of matters entering the law firm’s pipeline.

When a qualified matter is referred, the receiving firm is not expected to start from zero. Depending on the file, the package may include available tenancy or ownership records, lease materials, notice communications, environmental indicators, preliminary medical information, and other intake materials organized around liability and damages. This early organization is intended to shorten the time between intake review and legal decision-making, while also reducing the amount of staff labor typically required to determine whether the case deserves further investment.

Once a client is retained, MCC can be hired to continue to support the matter through a structured three-phase case-development model. Phase 1 focuses on environmental investigation, including property-condition development, professional testing, laboratory analysis, and industrial hygiene work designed to document the conditions inside the property. Rather than relying on anecdotal complaints alone, this phase is aimed at creating objective evidence of exposure conditions that can withstand scrutiny in negotiation and litigation.

Phase 2 moves into medical discovery. This phase can include exposure-informed laboratory panels, biomarker review, symptom documentation, and a more structured effort to understand how the environmental conditions may be affecting the claimant’s health. The goal is to move beyond generalized complaints and toward a medically grounded damages narrative that can support case value and causation strategy.

Phase 3 is designed to connect environmental and medical evidence. This work may include toxicological analysis, correlation of the property findings with the claimant’s symptom presentation, and, where appropriate, MD-level specific causation opinions and treatment-related guidance. The resulting work product is compiled into a litigation-ready Case Summary Report intended to support attorney review, demand preparation, settlement positioning, and early discovery planning

One of the biggest barriers to mold litigation is not just complexity, but cost. Environmental testing, laboratory work, medical discovery, and expert coordination can require substantial investment early in the life of the case, often before the defense has meaningfully engaged or liability has been fully tested. To address that issue, the expanded attorney program includes a qualified referral track supported by non-recourse client-side funding.

Under that structure, a third-party funding partners of MCC and Mohr Marketing who handle mold cases may cover defined Phase 1 through Phase 3 workup costs after counsel is retained on a qualified case. If there is no recovery, the client is not personally responsible for repaying those workup funds. This funding model is designed to reduce one of the most common reasons firms decline mold files: the reluctance to front significant capital on a technically demanding matter before the evidence is developed.

The timing benefit may be just as important as the financial benefit. In mold and habitability litigation, property conditions can change quickly. Remediation may occur, access to the premises may be lost, and evidence that would have been useful early in the case can deteriorate or disappear. By pairing vetted intake with a funding path that allows environmental and medical work to begin promptly after retention, the program aims to preserve evidence and strengthen leverage before the defense has an opportunity to erode the factual record.

MCC and Mohr Marketing also position the program as a business-development solution for plaintiff firms looking to diversify beyond more conventional dockets. The cases targeted by the program often involve chronic moisture intrusion, poor HVAC conditions, delayed or incomplete remediation, repeated landlord notice, and stronger habitability narratives. Across the portfolio described in those materials, single-plaintiff damage often falls in the $125,000 to $225,000 range, with many cases resolving before trial once environmental and medical proof is sufficiently developed.

That value proposition is central to the program’s pitch to trial firms. The opportunity, according to the materials, is not found in taking a higher volume of weak mold inquiries. It is found in creating a reliable system for identifying stronger files, reducing intake waste, coordinating expert development, and moving qualified cases toward meaningful settlement leverage. In that sense, the program is marketed less as a traditional lead service and more as an operational framework for opening a new, higher-friction practice segment without forcing the firm to reinvent the process on every file.

“This is not a name-and-number product,” said Ed Mohr. “The goal is to help firms evaluate stronger mold and habitability matters with less friction and more confidence. By the time counsel receives a serious lead, the case should already be organized around the issues that actually matter in litigation — liability, damages, collectability, documentation, and the practical path to proof.”

The program is intended for personal injury and civil litigation firms that already know how to negotiate and litigate serious cases but want a more dependable intake and development infrastructure for mold matters. The core obstacle is an operational one: many firms have the legal talent to handle these cases, but do not want to shoulder the burden of building a technically complex toxic tort file from a cold start. By solving that infrastructure problem, Mohr Marketing and MCC aim to make mold and habitability litigation more manageable, measurable, and profitable for partner firms.

The expanded offering also emphasizes coverage and consistency. Rather than positioning mold cases as occasional one-off opportunities, the program is built around the idea of helping firms secure a more reliable stream of vetted mold and habitability matters in favorable markets.

For firms that have historically passed on mold cases because the files felt too messy, too technical, or too capital-intensive, the expanded attorney program is designed to offer a different path: vetted intake, a structured scientific workup, organized case reporting, and a funding model that keeps qualified files moving. For Mohr Marketing and MCC, the broader objective is to turn a category many firms have treated as operationally burdensome into a repeatable and profitable docket segment.

About Mohr Marketing

Mohr Marketing is a legal marketing company focused on helping law firms grow through targeted lead generation, strategic content, and case-acquisition systems tailored to specialized practice areas. In this program, Mohr Marketing works with MCC to help law firms access vetted mold and habitability opportunities supported by a structured development model.

About Mold Case Consulting

Mold Case Consulting is a consultancy focused on the environmental and medical causation components of mold and habitability claims. Its model includes lead vetting, documentation gathering, environmental and medical case development, expert coordination, and litigation-oriented reporting designed to support counsel after retention.

Media Contact

Ed Mohr
Mohr Marketing
Allentown, Pennsylvania
www.MohrMktg.com
ed@mohrmktg.com

The integration arrives two days after OpenAI opened its beta self-serve Ads Manager to U.S. advertisers on May 5, 2026. With this release, CLM Sequoia clients can monitor ChatGPT Ads impressions, clicks, click-through rate, spend, cost per conversion, and conversions alongside the organic AI citation data the platform already collects.

OpenAI’s expansion changes the math for legal marketers. The previous pilot required a minimum spend of $50,000 and an introduction through a holding-company agency. The ad manager launch removes the spend floor, adds cost-per-click bidding, and supports conversion tracking through a pixel and the OpenAI Conversions API.

The ChatGPT Ads won’t replace the need for ChatGPT optimization for lawyers, as the ad platform operates seperately from organic ChatGPT citations and recommendations.

“Law firms have been asking whether ChatGPT Ads would matter for case acquisition. The answer is yes, and the time to test is now,” said Jason Bland, Co-Founder and CEO of Custom Legal Marketing. “Because of what we’ve built with our Sequoia platform, we were able to push our first campaigns live less than 24 hours after OpenAI opened the platform.”

The Sequoia integration pulls live data from OpenAI and renders it next to the organic AI visibility metrics CLM AI Monitor already tracks. A firm running ChatGPT Ads can view paid impressions on the same screen as the organic citations the firm earns through SEO and content. The dashboard supports day-over-day trend analysis, campaign-level breakdowns, and conversion attribution. It also feeds the core Sequoia knowledge bank to fast track conversion optimizations on the platform.

CLM Sequoia is the proprietary platform developed by Custom Legal Marketing over the past five years.

The Ads module is included for existing Custom Legal Marketing law firms. Additional ad platform integrations are planned as more AI platforms launch advertising capabilities.

In a recent documentary chronicling his journey, Sumekh reflected,

“The relationship I have with my team is actually what I’m most proud of. With each team member or staff that we hired, I was always focused on getting to know the staff, personal growth, and even when we brought in friends or family. All these people greatly contributed to the person I am today.”

Sumekh will retain a minority stake and continue to support Legal Soft in a strategic advisory capacity while shifting his primary focus to a new venture aimed at addressing long-standing operational and infrastructure gaps within the legal industry.

Since its founding, Legal Soft has supported more than 1,000 law firms and deployed over 3,000 highly trained remote legal professionals across 14+ practice areas, including Personal Injury, Immigration, Lemon Law, Employment, Bankruptcy, and more.

Nathan Sumekh, co-founder, added:

“Building Legal Soft was a global project that allowed me to connect with incredible professionals and support law firms and medical practices worldwide. I made lifelong friends, and I’m proud of what we built. Now I’m excited to build AI that automates the compliance and operational tasks we used to staff for so talented people can focus on work that requires human judgment.”

Watch the documentary on Nathan Sumekh’s journey building Legal Soft and his exit here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGU0kjgkJkk

A New Chapter: Building Disbo

After more than a decade building operational infrastructure for law firms, Sumekh identified a process that has gone largely unchanged since the 1950s: how personal injury firms pay medical providers. Most personal injury firms still mail checks to doctors for liens and medical records, a process that requires cutting checks, obtaining signatures, tracking delivery, and manual reconciliation. Disbo eliminates the check entirely: firms search a verified provider directory, initiate payment from their trust account, and funds move bank-to-bank with automated client notifications and three-way reconciliation built in.

The platform makes compliance, speed, and cost reduction structural advantages instead of operational trade-offs, replacing a manual process with a financial infrastructure built for modern legal practice.

Background: Legal Soft

Under Sumekh’s leadership, Legal Soft built the infrastructure to deploy 3,000+ specialized legal professionals across eight global offices. The company developed training systems specific to legal workflows and workforce redundancy models that guaranteed coverage during high-volume periods or unexpected turnover, enabling firms to reduce staffing costs by up to 70% while maintaining quality standards that resulted in sub-5% monthly client churn.

Sumekh’s business partner, Alex Tofer, Attorney and Founder, Tofer & Associates, added:

“Out of all the partners that I’ve had over the last 25 years in my legal practice, I would say that Nathan is by far in the top three of reliable, honest, trustworthy, and extremely competent partners I’ve ever had. He’s done more in the last, I would say, 5 years than most professionals I know have done in the last 20.”

Sumekh retains a minority stake in Legal Soft and will continue in a strategic advisory capacity. Legal Soft’s leadership, operations, and client relationships remain fully intact.

About Disbo

Disbo is a bank-to-bank disbursement infrastructure connecting personal injury law firms directly to medical providers. The platform replaces manual check-based payments with instant, compliant, fully reconciled transfers, eliminating one of the last major administrative bottlenecks in legal practice management.

https://www.disbo.com

About Nathan Sumekh

Nathan Sumekh is a legal industry operator and entrepreneur who spent over a decade building the infrastructure that powers how modern law firms run. At Legal Soft, he architected the systems behind a 3,000-person global workforce, spanning eight offices, and developed training programs, quality assurance models, and compliance-first staffing operations that served over 1,000 law firms nationwide across 14+ practice areas.

His work sits at the intersection of legal operations, workforce infrastructure, and regulatory compliance, giving him a ground-level understanding of where law firms lose time, money, and staff to broken processes. Disbo, his next venture launching later this year, applies that operational lens to one of the most persistent bottlenecks in personal injury practice: getting money from a trust account to a medical provider without a paper check.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/nathan-sumekh

The firm currently operates nine offices across Southern California, serving San Diego, Riverside, San Bernardino, Orange, and Los Angeles Counties, and will now extend that footprint north — opening a new office in San Jose in July 2026, followed by additional locations in Sacramento and the Oakland / San Francisco Bay Area in the fourth quarter of 2026.

Reel Fathers Rights will begin taking cases on June 1, 2026 for select Northern California courthouses, with statewide coverage across California by January 1, 2027. Once complete, the expansion will make Reel Fathers Rights the most comprehensive network of California family law attorneys focused on fathers’ rights, divorce, and child custody matters — with one firm, one mission, and 300+ years of combined experience serving fathers in every major region of the state.

Reel Fathers Rights is now recognized as one of the largest and fastest-growing family law firms in the United States. The 2026 expansion comes on the heels of the firm’s standout performance on the 2025 Inc. 5000 list, where Reel Fathers Rights was named the 3rd fastest-growing company in California, the #1 fastest-growing company in the legal industry nationwide, and the 13th fastest-growing company in the United States — across all industries. With more than 20 attorneys and over 300 years of combined courtroom experience, the firm now stands among the largest dedicated fathers’ rights practices in the country.

“Fathers across California deserve aggressive, compassionate, and deeply experienced legal representation — no matter what county they live in or what courthouse they’re walking into,” said Mark Reel Jr., Founder and CEO of Reel Fathers Rights. “With more than 300 years of combined courtroom experience and offices that will soon span the entire state, our team has the depth, expertise, and statewide reach that California fathers need when everything is on the line.”

Expansion Timeline: Statewide California Coverage by 2027

The rollout begins on June 1, 2026, when Reel Fathers Rights will start accepting cases in select Northern California courthouses. The firm will open its San Jose office in July 2026, followed by new offices in Sacramento and the Oakland / San Francisco Bay Area in the fourth quarter of 2026 — at which point the firm will also begin taking cases throughout the Sacramento area, including Sacramento, Placer, El Dorado, Yolo, Solano, and Sutter Counties. By January 1, 2027, Reel Fathers Rights will offer full coverage across the entire state of California — combining its existing nine Southern California offices with its new Northern California locations to create one unified, statewide family law practice. Each new location will be staffed by experienced family law attorneys offering services including divorce, child custody, child support, paternity, domestic violence defense, move-away cases, prenuptial and postnuptial agreements, and post-judgment modifications.

Northern California Counties Served

With the opening of the San Jose office in July 2026, Reel Fathers Rights will provide fathers’ rights representation throughout the greater Bay Area and surrounding regions, serving the following counties:

• Santa Clara County (San Jose, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Cupertino, Milpitas, Gilroy, Morgan Hill)
• Alameda County (Oakland, Fremont, Berkeley, Hayward, Livermore, Pleasanton, San Leandro, Union City)
• San Mateo County (Redwood City, San Mateo, Daly City, South San Francisco)
• San Francisco County (San Francisco)
• Contra Costa County (Concord, Richmond, Walnut Creek, Antioch, San Ramon)
• Santa Cruz County (Santa Cruz, Watsonville, Scotts Valley)
• San Benito County (Hollister, San Juan Bautista)
• San Joaquin County (Stockton, Tracy, Lodi, Manteca)
• Stanislaus County (Modesto, Turlock, Ceres)
• Merced County (Merced, Los Banos, Atwater)

When the Sacramento and Oakland / San Francisco offices come online in Q4 2026, Reel Fathers Rights will expand into the Sacramento area and surrounding Northern California counties, including Sacramento, Placer, El Dorado, Yolo, Solano, and Sutter Counties. Statewide coverage across all of California will be finalized by January 1, 2027.

300+ Years of Combined Family Law Experience — Now Statewide

What sets Reel Fathers Rights apart in California’s competitive family law landscape is the sheer depth of its bench. The firm is home to more than 20 attorneys focused exclusively on family law, collectively bringing over 300 years of combined courtroom experience to every case. That is more concentrated fathers’ rights trial experience than any other firm in California — and once the Northern California expansion is complete, that 300+ years of experience will be available to fathers in every region of the state, from San Diego to Sacramento and from the Inland Empire to the Bay Area. The team includes Certified Family Law Specialists recognized by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization, senior trial attorneys with decades of California bar membership, and attorneys with published appellate opinions. For fathers searching for a California family law attorney, Reel Fathers Rights offers something no other firm in the state can match: a large, specialized team, three centuries of combined courtroom experience, and a singular mission — protecting dads and their relationships with their children.

A Track Record of Recognition

Reel Fathers Rights attorneys hold a remarkable depth of peer-reviewed and industry recognition, including Super Lawyers, Super Lawyers Rising Stars, Best Lawyers in America, Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch, Elite Lawyer, Lawyers of Distinction, Martindale-Hubbell Client Champion awards, Certified Family Law Specialist credentials from the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization, and National Institute for Trial Advocacy (NITA) Family Law Program graduates. The firm holds an AV Preeminent rating from Martindale-Hubbell — the highest peer-review designation in the legal profession — and was named the #1 Law Firm on the 2025 Inc. 5000 list, the only law firm ever to achieve that distinction. Together, these recognitions reflect the firm’s sustained commitment to excellence, ethical advocacy, and results for the fathers it represents.

Earlier this year, Custom Legal Marketing announced that the 21-year-old company had been secretly building an AI law firm marketing platform for years. Within the platform is a research system that continuously runs experiments to train Sequoia’s knowledge base. While the majority of their findings are not shared publicly, the company has been releasing studies in recent months that challenge vanity metrics in the SEO industry.

Using its proprietary CLM Sequoia research platform, Custom Legal Marketing conducted what may be the largest empirical analysis in the legal space of Website Authority scores like Domain Authority and organic search rankings. The study captured thousands of search results across eight competitive practice areas and the 50 most populous U.S. cities, scoring each result for Moz Domain Authority and classifying sites by type: law firm, directory, or resource.

The findings were clear: among law firm websites competing against other law firms, Domain Authority showed no meaningful correlation with ranking position. Law firms with low DA scores routinely outranked firms with scores two, three, and even six times higher. The study found that the metric’s apparent predictive value was almost entirely an artifact of high-authority directories like Justia, SuperLawyers, and Yelp occupying top positions, not any relationship between DA and where individual law firms actually rank.

The study also tested DA’s predictive power through head-to-head matchups, comparing every pair of law firms competing within the same search results to determine how often the higher-DA firm actually ranked above the lower-DA firm. The results suggest that DA is barely more reliable than random chance at predicting which of two competing law firms will appear higher in Google’s results.

A companion analysis examined whether the industry’s two most widely used authority tools — Moz Domain Authority and Ahrefs Domain Rating even agree with each other when scoring the same websites. They did not. The two tools produced substantially different scores for the same legal domains, applied opposite scoring biases depending on the size of the website, and could not agree on which sites belonged in their respective top tiers. If the tools measuring “authority” cannot converge on what authority looks like, the study argues, neither score belongs on a law firm’s marketing dashboard.

The study does not suggest that Moz, Ahrefs, or similar platforms lack value. Both platforms offer extensive backlink analysis, competitive research, and link prospecting capabilities that remain useful for practitioners. While the two platforms may differ, Domain Authority and Domain Rating can help SEO teams assess the relative strength of a competitor’s or potential partner’s link portfolio. 

But focusing on a higher authority score will not improve your rankings. And a dropping authority score does not mean you’ll lose ground in your organic rankings. This means the scores are a helpful research insight but as a benchmark, they’re a vanity metric. 

The study includes practice-area-level breakdowns, quartile analysis, directory dominance data, and specific examples of low-DA law firms ranking in top positions for competitive keywords in major markets. It also offers strategic recommendations for law firms looking to evaluate their current SEO campaigns and the metrics their agencies report.

The full study, including methodology, interactive data visualizations, and a section addressing DA-focused agency pitches, is available at https://custom.legal/knowledge/website-authority-scores-and-search-rankings/.

This report is the latest in a series of proprietary research publications from the CLM Sequoia platform, which has previously examined page speed, AI-generated content, and URL structure as ranking factors in legal search. CLM Sequoia is Custom Legal Marketing’s AI-powered law firm marketing platform, purpose-built for legal marketing. It powers large-scale SERP analysis, AI visibility monitoring through its AI Monitor, competitive intelligence, and the original research program that drives both client strategy and CLM’s published industry studies.

Truck‑specific sourcing, not generic PI traffic

Under the new model, truck accident acquisition begins at the campaign layer, with strategy, targeting, and messaging built specifically around tractor‑trailer, semi‑truck, 18‑wheeler, and other commercial vehicle collisions rather than broad auto‑accident traffic. The program focuses on the kinds of matters that justify meaningful attorney attention—catastrophic injury, wrongful death, multi‑vehicle and cargo‑related crashes, and cases with substantial commercial policy exposure.

Instead of routing prospects to a general personal‑injury landing page, campaigns drive them to a dedicated truck accident authority experience that reflects the realities of FMCSA‑regulated operations, carrier responsibility, and higher‑limit commercial insurance structures. From the first interaction, the prospect journey is framed as a truck and commercial transportation conversation, not a standard motor‑vehicle claim with a “truck” checkbox.

Authority‑site experience and FMCSA‑informed workflow

At the center of the acquisition model is a truck accident authority site built for claimants who have been involved in collisions with commercial trucks, tractor‑trailers, delivery vehicles, and other DOT‑regulated fleets. The authority site is structured to mirror how sophisticated plaintiff firms analyze trucking matters: venue, carrier status, vehicle type, initial injury presentation, and potential coverage tiers.

Claimants move through an FMCSA‑informed intake and settlement‑estimator workflow that prompts them to provide structured information about:

• How the crash occurred and the type of trucks or commercial vehicles involved.
• The nature and severity of their injuries, medical treatment to date, and work loss.
• Indicators of commercial involvement, such as carrier branding, trailer configuration, and roadway context.

As they progress, the experience introduces concepts such as carrier responsibility, hours‑of‑service compliance, maintenance and inspection obligations, and commercial policy limits in accessible language. The goal is to educate claimants about why a truck accident claim is different from an ordinary car crash while collecting the data points trial teams actually use to evaluate trucking files.

Police‑report‑oriented verification before submission

Before an opportunity can be submitted, the workflow layers in a police‑report‑oriented verification step designed to encourage serious, documentation‑focused behavior. Claimants are prompted for details that tend to appear in an official crash report:

• Date, time, and location of the incident.
• Number and type of vehicles involved, including any commercial carriers.
• Basic crash description, including direction of travel and point of impact.
• Whether law enforcement responded and whether a report number is available or anticipated.

This pre‑submission structure is intended to filter out casual inquiries and low‑information “truck accident” contacts, and to surface prospects who can describe an event in a way that maps to a verifiable commercial vehicle collision. By the time the intake process is complete, the resulting record reflects more than a simple “truck” notation; it reflects a potential trucking matter described in police‑report and carrier language.

“Our objective was to move beyond the conventional ‘truck accident leads’ label and build a front‑end experience that actually looks and feels like a trucking intake,” said Ed Mohr of Mohr Marketing. “If a firm is serious about truck and commercial transportation work, it should not have to reverse‑engineer basic facts from a thin web form. The acquisition model should arrive at the firm already oriented around carrier involvement, documentation, and exposure.”

ReportLink: Intake intelligence and file‑readiness

Once a claimant completes the authority‑site and verification sequence, Mohr Marketing’s ReportLink framework takes over as the intake‑intelligence layer. ReportLink is designed to convert the raw submission into a structured opportunity file that intake teams and attorneys can review quickly and consistently.

Within ReportLink, trucking opportunities are organized around fields that matter to high‑end PI and trial practices, including:

• Claimant identity and contact details.
• Jurisdiction, venue, and basic routing cues.
• Commercial vehicle context, including carrier indicators where available.
• Injury patterns and treatment clues relevant to case valuation and resource allocation.
• Documentation signals, including police‑report information and crash‑scene details when supplied.

For leads, this structure supports faster triage and prioritization—firms can rank opportunities based on severity, commercial involvement, and documentation indicators rather than treating every “truck accident lead” as interchangeable. For signed truck accident cases, the same framework functions as an early file, giving litigation teams a more coherent starting point for coverage analysis, liability assessment, and strategic planning.

“ReportLink is intended to close the gap between a marketing contact and an attorney‑ready opportunity,” Mohr explained. “When a commercial trucking accident reaches a firm through this model, the information is structured in a way that aligns with how those cases are actually screened and advanced inside a serious plaintiff practice.”

Two offerings: exclusive truck leads and signed cases

Mohr Marketing’s truck‑specific program is built around two related offerings that draw on the same acquisition and structuring framework:

• Exclusive truck accident leads – Opportunities arising from the truck authority‑site and FMCSA‑informed intake flow are aligned to a single participating firm on an exclusive basis. Firms receive structured truck accident leads with commercial‑vehicle context and verification signals already present, rather than shared, marketplace‑style contacts with minimal differentiation.
• Signed truck accident cases – In select markets and subject to capacity, Mohr Marketing also supports delivery of signed truck and commercial transportation matters for firms that prefer engagement‑ready files over lead volume. These signed opportunities originate from the same truck‑specific campaigns, authority experience, and ReportLink structuring, but arrive at the firm in executed‑engagement status for further evaluation.

In both models, the emphasis is on truck‑specific sourcing, front‑end documentation, and structured intake, rather than high‑volume distribution of generic personal‑injury leads. The program is intended for firms that want to build or deepen a trucking docket in a deliberate, data‑driven manner rather than relying on incidental truck cases that happen to appear within general auto campaigns.

Joint advertising and administrative‑support structure

Mohr Marketing positions the truck acquisition program under a joint advertising and administrative‑support framework rather than as the sale of legal matters. Mohr Marketing serves as the media‑strategy and campaign‑management provider, coordinating truck‑specific advertising, authority‑site experiences, and the ReportLink intake‑intelligence layer. A separate administrative support partner may be available to assist with intake handling and document coordination, depending on firm preference and program design.

Participating firms remain responsible for their own legal, ethical, and jurisdiction‑specific compliance, including adherence to advertising, solicitation, and fee‑sharing rules in the jurisdictions where they practice. The program is structured to give firms a defined, transparent path from truck‑focused campaign to structured opportunity while preserving the independence of the attorney‑client relationship and each firm’s own professional obligations.

Availability and participation

Availability for the truck‑specific program is limited and will vary by market, jurisdiction, and firm capacity. Mohr Marketing is prioritizing firms that:

• Treat truck and commercial transportation cases as a distinct practice area.
• Have the infrastructure to respond promptly to higher‑value trucking inquiries.
• Are interested in a more disciplined, evidence‑oriented approach to truck accident lead generation and signed case acquisition.

Firms interested in exclusive truck accident leads, signed truck accident cases, or a blended approach can request a discussion of available markets, volume expectations, and case‑criteria alignment.

Media Contact
Ed Mohr
Mohr Marketing, LLC
Allentown, PA 18104
Phone: 610‑510‑7577
Email: ed@mohrmktg.com

About Mohr Marketing

Mohr Marketing is a legal‑industry marketing and intake strategy firm focused on helping plaintiff law practices build higher‑value dockets through structured acquisition models. The company designs and manages programs for personal injury and mass‑tort firms that need more than generic lead volume—prioritizing opportunities that are better documented, more selectively sourced, and aligned with how trial teams actually evaluate cases.

Through its truck‑specific acquisition framework and ReportLink intake‑intelligence platform, Mohr Marketing supports firms that treat truck and commercial transportation litigation as a distinct, high‑stakes practice area. The firm’s work spans campaign architecture, authority‑site experiences, FMCSA‑informed intake flows, and data‑driven intake structuring, with an emphasis on converting raw inquiries into opportunities that are closer to attorney‑ready files.

Mohr Marketing is based in Allentown, Pennsylvania, and works with plaintiff firms and litigation teams nationwide that are intentionally growing their inventories in areas such as motor‑vehicle accidents, trucking, and other complex injury matters.

“Mesothelioma litigation demands accuracy, sensitivity, and speed,” said Ed Mohr, President of Mohr Marketing. “We’ve designed a program that cuts through the noise and connects firms directly with individuals who meet real legal criteria—verified exposure histories and confirmed diagnoses—using a respectful, data‑driven approach.”

At the core of the program is a proprietary search intelligence model that identifies consumers actively researching mesothelioma, asbestos exposure, litigation, and FDA‑approved treatments including Pemetrexed (Alimta), Ipilimumab (Yervoy), and Nivolumab (Opdivo). From an estimated pool of 25,000 monthly searchers, Mohr Marketing resolves and enriches approximately 73% into actionable consumer profiles, then filters them through detailed legal qualification standards.

Key qualification criteria include:

• Documented asbestos exposure prior to the mid‑1980s, with priority given to pre‑1980 exposure
• Biopsy‑confirmed mesothelioma or asbestos‑related lung cancer diagnosed within the past 2–3 years
• High‑risk occupational exposure, including shipyards, Navy service, steel and paper mills, construction, electrical work, boiler operations, automotive repair, and other asbestos‑intensive environments

Once qualified, Mohr Marketing deploys coordinated, multichannel engagement campaigns targeting these exact individuals across email, IP‑targeted display, pre‑roll video, live‑intent media, and social platforms. This synchronized approach reinforces message visibility and drives action—achieving response rates of approximately 5% in recent campaigns.

“Firms are done paying for recycled or low‑quality mesothelioma leads,” Mohr added. “This program delivers transparency, control over case criteria, and performance you can measure immediately.”

Mesothelioma is a rare and aggressive cancer linked to asbestos exposure, often surfacing decades after initial contact. Given the complexity and urgency of these cases, Mohr Marketing’s outreach is designed to be clear, compliant, and empathetic—ensuring patients and families receive relevant information while connecting with experienced legal representation.

Plaintiff law firms interested in accessing qualified mesothelioma case opportunities can contact Ed Mohr at ed@mohrmktg.com to request lead availability, targeting criteria, and pilot campaign options.

About Mohr Marketing, LLC
Mohr Marketing is a performance‑driven marketing partner for plaintiff law firms, specializing in data‑powered lead generation and intake solutions across mass tort, personal injury, and complex litigation.

Media Contact:
Ed Mohr
President, Mohr Marketing, LLC
Email: ed@mohrmktg.com
Phone: 866-695-9058
Website: https://www.mohrmktg.com

Rafi Law Services will house the firm’s non-legal operations, including technology, marketing, and administration. Rafi Law Group will remain the legal practice, with all attorneys retaining full authority over client representation, including legal strategy and advising clients regarding litigation and settlement.

“This structure allows us to modernize how we operate without changing who we are,” said Brandon B. Rafi. “Our mission remains the same: deliver outstanding results for clients. What’s changing is our ability to scale that mission responsibly. This isn’t disruption for disruption’s sake. It’s modernization with clear guardrails that keep clients and ethics first.”

The MSO model has been widely used across professional services such as healthcare and accounting and is increasingly being adopted in the legal industry as firms seek capital to support growth and an improved client experience while ensuring attorney independence. Legal industry leaders note that rising operational complexity, technology costs, and client expectations are accelerating interest in the model, particularly among personal injury firms.

The strategic equity investor in Rafi Law Services, a leading investment manager with expertise in the legal services sector, is now a minority partner in Rafi Law Services, with Brandon B. Rafi maintaining majority ownership and control. Rafi will continue to solely own and control Rafi Law Group.

“Capital can support efficient delivery of legal services while ensuring independence of legal decision making,” said Andy Halaby, Chief Legal Officer of Rafi Law Services. “This structure ensures that lawyers retain sole authority over client representation, while giving us the operational strength to expand access to justice.”

Legal industry analysts note that personal injury firms are at the forefront of a broader shift toward consolidation in the legal sector, as firms seek scale, efficiency, and resilience in an evolving marketplace. Brandon B. Rafi believes transparency and governance are essential as the industry evolves and intends to play a visible leadership role in shaping best practices for ethical growth.

“As the legal industry evolves, firms have a choice about how they grow,” Rafi added. “It’s about building a sustainable structure that puts clients first, supports lawyers, and is prepared for the future of the legal profession.”

Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, Inc., a leading specialist investment bank to the financial services and legal sectors, and a wholly owned subsidiary of Stifel Financial Corp. (NYSE: SF) advised Brandon B. Rafi of Rafi Law Group as it identified and negotiated with its investment partner.

Landmark verdict follows fierce liability dispute, competing medical testimony, and defense claims of unrelated, exaggerated, and overlapping injuries

Bronx, New York — April 2, 2026 — Proner & Proner announced that a Bronx County jury has returned a verdict of $36,398,000 in favor of plaintiff Honorio Rosario‑Silverio in the matter of Honorio Rosario‑Silverio v. PPC Commercial, LLC, et al., tried before the Honorable Wilma Guzman in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Bronx County. The verdict was rendered on February 4, 2026.

The jury awarded a total of $36,398,000, including $5,000,000 for past pain and suffering, $20,000,000 for future pain and suffering, $10,000,000 for future medical expenses, $468,000 for past lost earnings, and $930,000 for future loss of earnings.

The case arose from a serious workplace accident on October 14, 2017, at a Foodtown supermarket in the Parkchester section of the Bronx. Mr. Rosario‑Silverio was working for his employer, a non‑party to the lawsuit, installing a commercial rack refrigeration system in the store’s basement. A metal plate had been placed over the basement stairway to create a makeshift ramp so the heavy refrigeration components could be moved downstairs.

According to the evidence presented at trial, ordinary cooking oil was applied to the ramp so the equipment would slide more easily into the basement. Plaintiff contended that the oil was supplied at the direction of the supermarket owner to speed up the work. While positioned at the top of the ramp to guide the equipment, Mr. Rosario‑Silverio slipped due to oil on his shoes and fell down the incline, suffering serious injuries.

Liability was sharply contested. The defense denied that the supermarket owner was present when the work was performed and insisted that all means and methods were controlled solely by plaintiff’s employer. The defense also offered testimony that Mr. Rosario‑Silverio was injured because he chose to walk up the ramp instead of using the adjacent staircase.

What initially appeared to be a minor injury—Mr. Rosario‑Silverio was treated and discharged from Jacobi Hospital with four stitches to his forearm—developed into a complex catastrophic injury case. Over time, he was diagnosed with significant shoulder and cervical spine injuries requiring surgery and a mild traumatic brain injury.

The defense presented a neurologist and neuroradiologist who claimed that Mr. Rosario‑Silverio had sustained no brain or neck injury, that his examinations were normal, and that he was capable of returning to work.

The case was further complicated by a subsequent accident in 2020, which the defense argued caused overlapping injuries and showed that plaintiff was seeking double recovery. Defendants called the treating orthopedic surgeon from the 2020 accident, who testified that before that incident, Mr. Rosario‑Silverio had reported doing well and having returned to work.

Despite these challenges, the plaintiff’s team presented extensive expert medical evidence linking Mr. Rosario‑Silverio’s traumatic brain and orthopedic injuries to the 2017 fall in the Foodtown basement. Plaintiff’s brain‑injury expert testified that advanced DTI MRI imaging and NeuroQuant analysis objectively confirmed brain trauma and placed Mr. Rosario‑Silverio at increased risk for early dementia. A neuroradiologist corroborated those findings, and plaintiff’s treating cervical spine and shoulder surgeons testified that the surgeries were necessitated by injuries sustained in the 2017 accident, not the later event.

Throughout the trial, the defense repeatedly attacked Mr. Rosario‑Silverio’s credibility, emphasizing that he was undocumented, paid off the books, and had not accurately reported all of his earnings for tax purposes. The defense also argued that any serious injury was limited to the initial laceration to his forearm. Nevertheless, the jury returned the largest premises‑accident personal injury verdicts in Bronx County in more than seven years. It is the largest personal injury verdict in New York on record ever for an individual undocumented immigrant worker.

The case was tried by Mitchell Proner and Daisy Koch of Proner & Proner.

“This verdict reflects the jury’s recognition that serious brain and orthopedic injuries are real and life‑altering, even when defendants try to dismiss them as minor, unrelated, or the product of a later incident,” said Mitchell Proner, trial counsel for the plaintiff. “The defense highlighted his immigration status, his off‑the‑books earnings, and a subsequent accident, but the evidence showed that what happened in that supermarket basement permanently changed Mr. Rosario‑Silverio’s life.”

Proner & Proner continues to represent victims of catastrophic personal injury, traumatic brain injury, construction and workplace accidents, premises liability, and motor vehicle negligence throughout New York.

Media Contact:
Mitchell Proner, mproner@prolaw1.com. (917)751-4926
Proner & Proner

CASE INFORMATION

County of Bronx
Honorio Rosario-Silverio v. PPC Commercial, LLC. and 1489 Food Corp., d/b/a Foodtown Supermarket,
Case No. 31210/2017E