Martindale-Hubbell AV Preeminent Rating Explained

What a Martindale-Hubbell Rating Actually Is

A Martindale-Hubbell rating is a peer-review designation that signals a lawyer’s legal ability and ethical standards based on confidential evaluations from other attorneys and, in some cases, judges. It is one of the oldest and most established ratings in the legal directory ecosystem, with a methodology that has evolved across more than a century of use.

Martindale-Hubbell has facilitated peer ratings for U.S. and Canadian attorneys since 1887, making it the longest-running attorney rating system in North America. The current system produces three named ratings (AV Preeminent, Distinguished, and Notable), supplemented by a separate Judicial Edition award and a client-review system. The full picture matters because the rating is what shows on your profile, in third-party listings, and on the badges firms display on their websites.

For law firms thinking about visibility and credibility online, the Martindale-Hubbell rating is one signal among many. It does not replace law firm reputation management or active review management on Google and other platforms, but it does carry weight with referring attorneys, in-house counsel, and clients who research lawyers before they call.

Key Takeaways

• The Martindale-Hubbell rating evaluates a lawyer on two dimensions: legal ability (five subcategories rated 1 to 5) and general ethical standards.
• The three current peer-review tiers are AV Preeminent (highest), Distinguished, and Notable.
• Approximately 10 percent of rated attorneys hold the AV Preeminent designation, according to Martindale-Hubbell.
• The Judicial Edition adds judges’ evaluations to the standard peer review and is widely considered the highest possible distinction.
• Attorneys must be admitted to the bar for at least three years, located in the U.S. or Canada, and listed on Martindale.com to be eligible.
• Lawyers cannot pay for a rating. Peer reviews drive the score, and disciplinary actions can result in immediate removal.

The Three Current Peer Review Rating Tiers

There are three peer-review tiers in the current Martindale-Hubbell system, plus a separate Judicial Edition designation. Each tier reflects a different combination of legal ability scores and ethical standards ratings, as confirmed by Martindale-Hubbell’s official methodology.

AV Preeminent (Highest)

AV Preeminent is awarded to attorneys whose peers rate them at the highest level of professional excellence across legal knowledge, communication skills, and ethical standards. Lawyers in this tier carry average peer scores between 4.5 and 5.0 on the legal ability scale and a “Very High” rating on general ethical standards.

Martindale-Hubbell reports that roughly 10 percent of all rated attorneys hold this designation, making it a genuinely selective mark of recognition.

 ~10% of rated attorneys hold the AV Preeminent designation, per Martindale-Hubbell.

Distinguished (Mid-Tier)

Distinguished, sometimes shown as BV Distinguished, recognizes lawyers with some practice experience who are respected by their peers for professional achievement and ethical standards. Average scores in this tier fall in the 3.0 to 4.4 range. It is still a significant achievement and a credible signal to potential clients and referring attorneys.

Notable

Notable is the entry-tier rating awarded to lawyers who have been recognized by a substantial number of peers for strong ethical standards and developing legal ability. It is generally seen in attorneys earlier in their careers who have met the eligibility threshold but have not accumulated the peer scores needed for the higher tiers.

The Legacy A-B-C System

Older Martindale-Hubbell profiles still reference the legacy rating language: AV, BV, and CV. Those abbreviations come from the original A-B-C scale for legal ability, plus a “V” for “Very High” ethical standards. An AV rating under the old system corresponds roughly to AV Preeminent today. The transition modernized the descriptors but kept the same core idea of pairing legal ability with ethical standing.

How the Martindale-Hubbell Rating System Works

Martindale-Hubbell’s rating system relies on a structured peer-review process that evaluates two dimensions: general ethical standards and legal ability. An attorney has to clear the ethical standards threshold first, then receives a numerical score across five legal ability criteria.

The five legal ability criteria, according to Martindale-Hubbell’s published methodology, are:

1. Legal Knowledge: The lawyer’s familiarity with the laws governing their practice area.
2. Analytical Capabilities: Creativity in analyzing legal issues and applying technical knowledge.
3. Judgment: The soundness of professional decision-making.
4. Communication Ability: Written and oral communication with clients, peers, and courts.
5. Legal Experience: Depth and breadth of relevant practice over time.

Reviewers score each category on a 1 to 5 scale. To advance to a tier in the first place, the attorney must also meet the “Very High” criteria on the General Ethical Standards Rating, which covers professional conduct, reliability, diligence, and other duties.

The reviews themselves come from currently practicing attorneys or sitting judges who know the lawyer’s work. Martindale-Hubbell sends confidential online surveys to references the attorney submits, then aggregates those scores once a minimum threshold of qualifying responses is reached. No single reviewer’s input is identifiable in the final rating.

Eligibility Requirements for Martindale-Hubbell Ratings

To be eligible for a Martindale-Hubbell peer review rating, an attorney must meet a specific set of baseline requirements published by Martindale-Hubbell. These rules apply equally to attorneys hoping to be rated and to those reviewing their peers.

According to Martindale-Hubbell’s published criteria, an attorney must:

• Be located in the United States or Canada (Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Pacific Territories, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are also eligible).
• Be admitted to the bar for at least three years.
• Have an active profile on martindale.com.
• Submit a list of qualified reviewers (other practicing attorneys or sitting judges familiar with their work).

Reviewers must also be currently practicing attorneys or sitting judges listed in the Martindale-Hubbell database. Per local rules, judges in Connecticut, Georgia, New Jersey, and South Carolina are not eligible to participate as reviewers. A paid subscription is not required to receive peer reviews, which is one of the system’s strongest credibility signals: attorneys cannot pay their way into a higher rating.

The Judicial Edition: What Makes It Different

The Judicial Edition of the AV Preeminent rating is a separate award based on the confidential opinions of judges familiar with the attorney’s work, not just fellow attorneys. It is widely viewed as the highest possible Martindale-Hubbell distinction because it reflects evaluations from the bench, not only from the bar.

While the standard AV Preeminent rating draws from peer attorney reviews, the Judicial Edition is generated through a separate survey process that includes members of the judiciary. Recipients are recognized for the highest ratings on both legal ability and ethical standards as evaluated by judges who have observed them in practice.

Litigators, trial attorneys, and lawyers whose work routinely puts them in front of the bench often place special emphasis on the Judicial Edition. For appellate practice, complex civil litigation, and high-stakes criminal defense, judicial recognition can be a meaningful trust signal for both referring counsel and prospective clients. For transactional attorneys with limited courtroom exposure, the Judicial Edition is harder to obtain and is sometimes less central to their reputation strategy.

How to Get Considered for a Martindale-Hubbell Rating

Getting considered for a Martindale-Hubbell rating involves three concrete steps, each gated by Martindale-Hubbell’s eligibility rules and review thresholds. The process is initiated by the attorney or firm, not by Martindale-Hubbell.

The steps published by Martindale-Hubbell are:

1. Confirm eligibility and claim a Martindale.com profile: An attorney must meet the three-year practice minimum, be located in the U.S. or Canada, and have a complete profile.
2. Submit a list of attorney references for the peer review survey: Martindale-Hubbell contacts those references via email with a confidential online survey.
3. Reach the threshold of qualifying responses: Once Martindale-Hubbell receives enough completed reviews, the ratings team determines whether the attorney qualifies for AV Preeminent, Distinguished, or Notable.

Attorneys who are already rated can be re-evaluated when peer feedback warrants a review. Disciplinary actions reported by a state bar (suspension or disbarment, for example) result in immediate removal of the rating, per Martindale-Hubbell’s published policy. The platform also reserves the right to investigate other bar or judicial information that may affect an attorney’s ethical standing.

Why Some Firms Display the Rating Prominently and Others Ignore It

Whether a firm prominently displays a Martindale-Hubbell rating depends on its practice area, audience, and broader marketing strategy. The rating is not equally valuable across every type of legal practice.

Firms that lean heavily on the rating tend to share a few characteristics. They serve sophisticated buyers (in-house counsel, business owners, other attorneys making referrals) who recognize the distinction. They practice in fields where peer respect translates directly into work, such as commercial litigation, white-collar defense, mergers and acquisitions, and high-stakes family law. They also tend to be established firms with senior partners who have accumulated decades of peer recognition.

Other firms, especially consumer-facing practices in personal injury or family law, often place less weight on Martindale-Hubbell and more weight on Google reviews, Avvo ratings, and Super Lawyers recognition.

The reasoning is practical: a client searching “best personal injury lawyer near me” on a mobile device is more likely to look at Google star ratings than a peer designation they have never heard of. For these firms, the broader investment inattorney reputation management tends to focus on visibility and reviews on the platforms clients actually use.

Both positions are defensible. The rating is real, the methodology is sound, and the recognition is genuine. The question is whether your specific audience knows what it means.

Martindale-Hubbell vs Other Legal Directories

Martindale-Hubbell is one of several major directories that influence how lawyers are perceived online. Each has a different rating philosophy, audience, and SEO footprint, and most firms appear on more than one.

Directory	Rating type	Primary audience	What it signals
Martindale-Hubbell	Peer review (attorneys and judges)	Referring attorneys, in-house counsel	Legal ability and ethics, validated by peers
Avvo	Algorithm-driven score (1-10) plus client reviews	Consumers searching for lawyers	Experience, disciplinary history, peer endorsements
Super Lawyers	Peer nomination plus independent research	Attorneys and informed consumers	Top 5 percent designation in a state and practice area
Lawyers.com	Profile directory linked to Martindale data	Consumers and referrers	Directory presence; ratings carry over from Martindale
Google Business Profile	Star rating and client reviews	Local consumers	Customer experience and local search visibility

Lawyers.com is part of the same Martindale-Avvo network, so Martindale-Hubbell ratings appear there as well.

How Martindale-Hubbell Affects Your Online Reputation

A Martindale-Hubbell rating affects your online reputation in three concrete ways: it provides a trust signal in search results, it shapes how referring attorneys evaluate you, and it gives your firm a credible third-party credential to feature on your own website and marketing materials.

When potential clients search for an attorney by name, the martindale.com profile often appears in the first page of results alongside Avvo, Super Lawyers, and the firm’s own website. A visible AV Preeminent or Distinguished rating on that profile reinforces credibility before the prospect ever reaches your homepage. For high-stakes engagements where clients perform careful due diligence before calling, this matters.

The rating also shapes the referral economy among lawyers. Attorneys referring matters out of their practice area often check Martindale-Hubbell, especially when sending a client to counsel in another state. A strong rating shortens the trust gap, particularly for cross-border or multi-jurisdictional referrals.

The risk to manage is the gap between a strong peer rating and weak public-facing reviews. A firm with AV Preeminent recognition but a 2.8-star Google rating sends a mixed message that sophisticated buyers will notice. Strong reputation management treats peer ratings, client reviews, and search visibility as parts of one coherent presence rather than as separate channels.

For firms dealing with negative reviews, defamatory content, or search-result issues that undermine an otherwise strong directory profile,content removal and suppression services can help align the broader online narrative with the peer recognition the firm has already earned.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can attorneys pay to receive an AV Preeminent rating?

No. Martindale-Hubbell’s peer review ratings are based on confidential surveys of attorneys and judges, not on paid placements or subscriptions. A paid subscription gives a firm access to additional marketing tools on Martindale.com, but it does not influence whether the attorney qualifies for AV Preeminent, Distinguished, or Notable.

How long does a Martindale-Hubbell rating last?

Ratings do not expire on a fixed schedule, but they can be updated, downgraded, or removed in response to new peer reviews or disciplinary actions. Martindale-Hubbell automatically removes ratings for attorneys reported by a state bar as disbarred or suspended.

What can a lawyer do about a low or unfavorable rating?

Attorneys who receive a lower rating than expected can submit additional peer references for re-evaluation. Building a stronger record of positive peer reviews over time is the most direct path. Engaging meaningfully with the bar (publications, speaking engagements, judicial appearances) tends to translate into stronger peer recognition.

Does Martindale-Hubbell still send paper directories?

The print Law Directory has largely been retired in favor of the digital platform. Today, the rating’s visibility comes through Martindale.com profiles, Lawyers.com listings, and the badges firms display on their own websites and marketing materials.

How does the Martindale-Hubbell rating compare to Avvo?

Martindale-Hubbell is peer-driven and based on qualitative evaluations from attorneys and judges. Avvo uses an algorithm that incorporates experience, disciplinary history, peer endorsements, and client reviews to produce a 1 to 10 score. The two are complementary rather than competing, which is why most firms maintain profiles on both. For a deeper breakdown of the Avvo methodology, see our companion guide to the Avvo rating system.

Building a Reputation That Matches Your Rating

A Martindale-Hubbell rating reflects what your peers think of you. The rest of your online presence reflects what everyone else thinks. Both need to align.

NetReputation works with law firms and individual attorneys to align directory credentials, Google reviews, search visibility, and unwanted-content removal into a single, defensible online presence. Ourlegal reputation management practice covers everything from review management to suppression of defamatory content, with attention to the ethical guardrails that govern attorney marketing.

If your peer recognition is strong but your Google results or review profile is working against you, that gap is solvable. Our team can assess where the inconsistencies are and recommend a path that protects both your professional standing and your client acquisition.