Primary sources first
Legal research begins with current statutes, court and agency material, government records, and official licensing directories. Institutional explanations may support orientation but do not displace controlling law.
Editorial standards
These rules govern how Injury Lawyer Compass turns public legal information and directory data into a useful research experience.
Published September 24, 2026Applies sitewide
No individualized legal conclusions
We explain questions, process, and research routes. We do not calculate a visitor’s deadline, assign fault, value a claim, predict an outcome, or form an attorney-client relationship.
Geographic specificity with restraint
Location pages use sourced population data, actual directory geography, and locally relevant research prompts. We avoid implying knowledge of an unnamed court, hospital, road, or incident.
Firm neutrality
A profile is informational, not an endorsement. Organic firm selections rotate on a stable monthly basis; payment, public ratings, and review volume do not determine that order.
Clear content labels
Hypothetical case studies are identified as illustrative. Editorial imagery is not documentary evidence. Directory categories and tags are described as source data, not verified specialization.
Human verification route
Readers are directed to licensing sources and encouraged to confirm practice scope, team, conflicts, availability, fees, expenses, and engagement terms directly.
Automation is disclosed
Structured and AI-assisted tools may help organize source material and draft page components. Automation is not presented as professional judgment, first-hand legal experience, or attorney review.
Review workflow
How substantive content is handled
- ScopeDefine the reader’s decision and the jurisdiction or claim system involved.
- SourceLocate current primary material and record direct source links.
- DraftUse plain language, qualify general rules, and surface exceptions rather than hiding them.
- VerifyCheck dates, cross-references, labels, links, page metadata, and whether the text overstates what a source supports.
- MaintainRe-review time-sensitive legal content and respond to documented corrections.
Source hierarchy
What carries the most weight
- Controlling and official materialCurrent statutes, court rules and opinions, official agencies, and licensing authorities.
- Institutional orientationGovernment explainers, court self-help material, bar organizations, and established public institutions.
- Directory source dataPublic firm identity, category, contact, address, and geography fields supplied through Injury Firm Finder.
- Editorial synthesisPlain-language questions, checklists, and navigation that must not overstate what the underlying material establishes.
Update policy
Dates mean something specific
A “reviewed” date means the cited links and the published summary were checked on that date. It is not a guarantee that a source will never change afterward. Material legal content should display a review date; directory contact data is refreshed through the mother API rather than rewritten in this repository.
Substantive corrections should preserve a clear change history in version control. Firm removal requires reliable evidence of permanent closure or another valid basis; one unreachable website is not enough.