Skip to main content

When did Avvo remove the ability for attorneys to change or add to the area of law that questioners selected?

New York, NY |
Filed under: Professional ethics

I'm a frequent attorney contributor to this site who just noticed that you don't seem able to change the area of law a questioner miscatagorized the question under (typically "Family Law" or "Ethics" for questions which involved neither area). Has anyone else noticed this?

(Oh, I see, when the question is asked, the website automagically seems to try to categorize the questions based on the text in the questions and gives the questioners some choices.)

And don't you think Avvo should give the lawyers a closed forum somewhere on this site where suggestions and features like this can be discussed?

Attorney Answers 4

  1. Yes, I liked the ability to fix the category and I like your idea for a lawyers only forum.

    I may be guessing or not licensed in your state. No atty/client relationship exists.

  2. Avvo has its defects and our gripes will never be addressed.

    Good luck.

  3. I agree. I have to correct someone at least once a week that legal "ethics" doesn't mean any question about contract disputes, child custody, etc. While I have no quibble with the automagic suggestions of subject matter areas, wouldn't it be helpful for attorneys to try to change the topic areas or add to them and get a participation point or two for their efforts, like the old system.

    BTW, there **is** some kind of third party discussion board at for a lawyer's "feature suggestion box" and forum, but that site has a pathetically low level of participation and the few questions on the site ask why no queries seem to be responded to :-/

    Avvo is a great resource and gets a lot of Google love (much more than the Lexis Martindale or Superlawyers sites), but it could stand some improvement and there seems to be a disconnect between participants and management, except when it comes to Avvo's sales of it's own add on products, like Excite websites.

    This answer is provided under the “Terms and Conditions of Use” (“ToU”), particularly ¶9 which states that any information provided is not intended as legal advice or to create an attorney-client relationship between you and me or any other attorney. Such information is intended for general informational purposes only and should be used only as a starting point for addressing your legal issues. In particular, my answers and those of others are not a substitute for an in-person or telephone consultation with an attorney licensed to practice in your jurisdiction about your specific legal issue, and you should not rely solely upon Legal Information you obtain from this website or other resources which may be linked to an answer for informational purposes. You understand that questions and answers or other postings to the Site are not confidential and are not subject to attorney-client privilege. The full Avvo ToU are set forth at . In addition, while similar legal principles often apply in many states, I am only licensed to practice in the State of New York and Federal Courts. Any general information I provide about non-New York laws should be checked with an attorney licensed to practice in your State. Lastly, New York State Court rules (22 NYCRR Part 1200, Rule 7.1) also require me to inform you that my answers and attorney profile posted on the site may be considered "attorney advertising" and that "prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome".

  4. This "reform" happened several months back and some regular attorney participants engaged in lengthy objections and exchanges with Avvo V P Josh King, who can be fairly responsive on some extreme and inarguable issues of Avvo Q and A practices. King's non-negotiable responses on attorney participants' objections and citations of failures of the new practice were that Avvo has accumulated and analyzed a vast amount of data showing that this auto feature is a significant improvement, and individual responding attorneys view only isolated "anecdotal" exceptions to the tidal wave of data. King specifically disclaimed any objective or purpose based on "point-grabbing," which I frankly find credible since abusive point-grabbing seems not to register at all with Avvo quality control staff and managers.

    More info? Email me off-site:

    No legal advice here. READ THIS BEFORE you contact me! My responses to questions on Avvo are never intended as legal advice and must not be relied upon as if they were legal advice. I give legal advice ONLY in the course of a formal attorney-client relationship. Exchange of information through Avvo's Questions forum does not establish an attorney-client relationship with me. That relationship is established only by joint execution of a written agreement for legal services. My law firm does not provide free consultations. Please do not call or write to me with a “few questions” that require me to analyze the specific facts of your history and your license application and prescribe for you how to get a State license. Send me an email to schedule a paid Consultation for that kind of information, direction, and assistance. My law firm presently accepts cases involving State and federal licenses and permits; discipline against State and federal licenses; and disciplinary and academic challenges to universities, colleges, boarding schools, and private schools. We take cases of wrongful termination or employment discrimination only if the claims involve peace officers, universities or colleges.

Professional ethics topics

Top tips from attorneys

What others are asking

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.

Ask a Question

- or -

Search for lawyers by reviews and ratings.

Find a Lawyer

Browse all legal topics