Both lawyers may hold the same TBLS credential, yet propose quite different ways of handling your claim. Verify that each is currently Board Certified in Personal Injury Trial Law and licensed in Texas. Then compare who will do the work, what similar disputes that person has handled, the proposed investigation, communication and written fee terms. Certification establishes a professional qualification; it does not decide which lawyer fits your case.
Confirm that you are comparing the right credential
Start with the lawyer's full name. Not the firm's slogan, not the billboard, the name. (A firm's own attorney page, like Aaron A. Herbert's, should give you the name to search.) Put it into the TBLS attorney directory and confirm two things: the specialty says Personal Injury Trial Law, and the credential is current. Then check the State Bar of Texas directory for the license and whatever public information sits there. Why bother? Because a lawyer can be certified in some other specialty. Or a firm can employ one certified lawyer who will never touch your file. Credentials don't transfer from the name on the door to the associate who answers your calls. Our pillar on what it means to be board certified in personal injury trial law in Texas walks through the standards.
Board certification is voluntary. The Texas Board of Legal Specialization's standards include qualifying practice, trial responsibilities, continuing education, references, and examination requirements for initial certification. Recertification has its own standards. Meeting those standards is significant, but it is not a head-to-head contest. Two certified lawyers may have very different experience with truck crashes, retail premises, traumatic brain injury, products, or complex insurance questions. Ask about the specific specialty and the work relevant to the problem you have.
Look up the organization behind each badge. Check its selection date, criteria and any payment for inclusion. Then decide whether it says anything useful about the work proposed for you.
Bring the Same Facts to Each Meeting
Give each firm the same incident summary and documents. Include injuries, treatment, witnesses and insurance. Put urgent matters first: vehicle repairs, disappearing video, an offer deadline or involvement of a government body such as a city or school district.
Then ask each lawyer what they'd need to learn before committing to a theory. Watch for whether they separate what's already supported from what only you have said so far. Which company or person might actually be responsible? What evidence could be gone by next week? What's the defense going to argue? A good answer usually includes some version of “I don't know yet.” Confidence is great when it's built on investigation. Confidence built on a ten-minute phone narrative is a sales technique.
Records, witness interviews, a scene review and a conflict check may be needed before counsel can give a complete opinion. In the first meeting, look for an explanation of the issues and the work needed to answer them. Where the lawyers disagree, ask which fact or rule accounts for the difference.
Experience With Your Disputed Issue
Choose a disputed issue to discuss: notice of a store hazard, a carrier’s logs, or the medical testimony needed to support lifetime care. When did this lawyer last handle that kind of problem? Ask about the work while leaving former clients’ confidential details private.
Ask the lawyer to describe a difficult decision from that work. Perhaps a third party withheld a record, responsibility was contested or an expert disputed the cause of injury. What led counsel to negotiate, file suit or prepare for trial? An explanation of what failed and what counsel learned can be as useful as a successful result.
For an advertised result, ask what this lawyer and this firm actually did. Compare the underlying problem with yours. Counsel may be unable to discuss a confidential settlement in detail, and past results cannot guarantee a recovery for you.
Compare the actual people and the proposed staffing
Here's a common experience. You meet the certified founder, sign, and then spend the next eighteen months talking to an associate, a case manager, and a paralegal. That can be perfectly appropriate, if responsibilities are clear and someone senior is actually supervising. So ask. Who has primary responsibility for my case? Which lawyer looks at the important evidence? Who leads if we file suit, who takes the key depositions, and who stands up at trial? When might those assignments change, and how would I find out? Ask both firms the same thing, word for word. (We wrote a whole piece on who will handle your injury case if you hire a firm led by a board certified lawyer.)
“Who do I call if my doctor changes the treatment plan?” and “Who will explain a settlement offer?” are useful questions for the person you expect to contact. Meet that person if possible. Find out how a legal question reaches the lawyer and when to expect an update.
Work out whether the proposed team has the time and resources your matter needs. A small office might use investigators, experts or co-counsel; a larger firm might assign an internal team. For either arrangement, ask who controls deadlines, reviews the evidence and approves substantial expenses.
Compare the first thirty days
The single most revealing question you can ask may be this one: “If you took my case today, what would you do in the first thirty days?” In a truck collision, a good answer gets into the truck's data, the carrier's records, the witnesses, the scene, and building a medical chronology (our Texas truck accident evidence and litigation hub shows what that looks like). In a store fall, it's the video, the inspection records, the employees, the incident paperwork, the photos, and notice. In a disputed medical-causation case, the early work is pulling records from before and after the event and finding a qualified reviewer.
Ask which two or three evidence sources need attention first. Which can counsel request now, and which may require a lawsuit or other process? If an investigator is proposed, ask about the job, its likely cost and why it is justified. An item facing deletion tomorrow calls for a different timetable from a record that is securely retained.
Also ask what the client should do. The lawyer may request original images, contact information, documents, and an accurate treatment history. They should caution against disposal of physical evidence. They should not suggest that treatment be exaggerated or that unfavorable facts be withheld. Compare how clearly each lawyer explains the client's part in the work.
How Each Lawyer Handles Uncertainty
How does the defense version change the analysis of fault and injury causation? Have each lawyer work through it. Also discuss the money available through insurance or other assets: a favorable judgment still has to be collected.
For an early estimate, ask what has been reviewed and what is assumed. Unseen video, an unread policy or missing medical records may change it. Find out what the firm would check next.
Bring up facts that worry you, including prior medical problems, missed treatment or a witness who disagrees. Ask how counsel would investigate and explain them. A truthful account can still be difficult to prove. You need to know how the lawyer would discuss that difficulty with you before a settlement decision is due.
Who Would Prepare the Case for Trial?
Identify the people proposed for depositions, experts, motions, mediation and trial. Ask about their recent work in similar disputes. What would lead them to file suit, and when might an early settlement make sense? A firm’s trial history is relevant only insofar as the team on your matter can use that experience.
Do not require a lawyer to promise a trial. A sound settlement may serve you well. Instead, ask whether the firm has the ability and willingness to pursue a supported claim if negotiations fail, what additional expense would be required, and when counsel would revisit the decision with you. A firm may bring in co-counsel for a specialist issue; ask what role that lawyer would perform and how any fee arrangement affects you.
Ask about a specific part of trial preparation: authenticating a business record, establishing an event’s time, explaining other possible medical causes or preventing duplicated damages. The response should identify the work and the people needed to do it.
Read the Fees and Costs Together
Ask both firms to calculate net proceeds using identical hypothetical settlement and expense figures. Follow each draft agreement through any percentage change and the order of fee and cost deductions. Include the expert and deposition expenses. Then ask what happens to costs if the case fails, and read the provisions on liens, ending the engagement, appeals, referrals and co-counsel. No example predicts the result of your case.
Compare the expense provisions along with the percentage. Who advances litigation costs, and will you hear about a major expenditure before it is incurred? Confirm the claims covered by the agreement. Medical liens or reimbursement obligations may reduce the client’s share. The Texas injury claim value and litigation hub discusses the difference between a gross recovery and net proceeds.
If a firm proposes a change to its standard agreement, make sure it is written and consistent with the final document. Do not rely on an oral assurance that an ambiguous term “never applies.” A candidate's willingness to explain costs is a useful measure of how they may communicate when a difficult settlement offer arrives.
Experience in the Relevant Court
After identifying a possible court, ask about counsel’s recent work there. What practical help would that experience bring to this case?
For example, familiarity with an area may help counsel find an investigator or witness and plan around courthouse procedures. It cannot promise a ruling or a jury. Judges and trial dates may change.
If the injury happened away from home or involves an out-of-state company, ask where a claim could be brought and which law may apply. Find out who would do the site work and whether additional counsel is needed. Jurisdiction, federal issues and venue require facts before a reliable answer is possible.
Use a structured comparison after the meetings
After the meetings, put the answers side by side. Record the verified specialty, relevant experience, early evidence work, responsible team, update process and fee terms. Include the main risk each lawyer identified. An empty space beside one of those subjects is a useful follow-up question.
A large difference in estimates deserves a follow-up. Compare the records reviewed and the assumptions about future care, earnings, fault, coverage and collection. Neither estimate should stand on the lawyer’s confidence alone. Ask for its basis before making a commitment.
Consider whether you could work with this team through a difficult case. Could you discuss private medical or financial details and understand advice you did not want to hear? The people, proposed work and communication all matter alongside the credential.
Questions to bring to both consultations
Use the same consultation checklist:
- Name the certified lawyer and the attorney responsible for this file.
- Discuss recent work on a similar injury, defendant or disputed issue.
- What evidence could disappear, and what could undermine responsibility?
- How would earlier medical problems affect the investigation?
- Who would handle suit, depositions and trial, and when might those steps be warranted?
- Work through expenses, fees and liens to explain net proceeds.
- Set out the update process and the major uncertainties.
Leave room to record what still needs an answer.
You won't get complete answers to all of those before the records come in. Note which ones are pending and when the lawyer expects to resolve them. The best lawyer for your case isn't necessarily the one with an instant answer to every uncertain question. It may be the one who can tell you exactly what's missing and how to go get it.
Frequently asked questions
Should I automatically choose the lawyer with more verdicts? No. First establish that person’s role in the cases and whether they involved issues like yours. Compare the proposed evidence work, team, updates and written fees as well.
Does board certification guarantee that either lawyer will take my case? No. Conflicts, time, resources and the merits still have to be considered. Ask whether representation has been accepted and have its scope clarified in writing. Do not leave an approaching deadline to an assumption that someone is handling it.
Can both lawyers be excellent but give different recommendations? Yes. Compare the facts each is assuming. Ask what missing evidence could settle the disagreement; available resources and views of risk may account for some of it.
Is it appropriate to ask about disciplinary history? Yes. First confirm that the public record identifies this lawyer. Ask about a finding and its context; a mere allegation has not established misconduct.
A comparison exercise using a contested store injury
Picture two certified lawyers meeting the same person, someone who fell on a wet floor and got seriously hurt. Nobody yet knows how long the liquid had been there. Lawyer A talks about a large past verdict and says the store “must be liable” because an employee was standing nearby. Lawyer B says the case may turn on how long the spill sat, whether that employee had a chance to see it, and what the inspection records look like, and proposes preserving every relevant camera view, identifying the employee, getting the original incident photos, and reviewing whatever inspection data exists (see our Walmart injury claims in Texas hub for why notice matters so much). With nothing else to go on, the second answer is more useful. It tells you what could prove or disprove the disputed element. It does not prove Lawyer B would get the better result.
If A’s investigator is available today and B’s in a week, ask about a preservation request now. Establish who follows up on it and how a refusal would be handled. That may alter the earlier comparison of their proposed work.
Suppose B also leaves the responsible attorney unnamed, whereas A provides written cost and update terms. Take the missing question back to B. A further conversation may resolve it before you choose.
When the Injury’s Cause Is Disputed
Consider the same client at two consultations: shoulder pain began after a crash; memory and concentration complaints came weeks later.
- A promises payment for all treatment, relying on the absence of an earlier cognitive diagnosis.
- B asks for prior records, the symptom timeline and the treating clinicians’ views before deciding whether a specialist is needed.
The lack of an earlier diagnosis does not establish the cause of later symptoms.
Ask the lawyer to explain what happens next if both injuries are supported, if the shoulder claim is stronger, or if the cognitive issue stays unresolved. Include the cost and timing of an expert review before discussing a settlement recommendation.
These are hypotheticals. They're here to show how to compare a lawyer's reasoning instead of treating a consultation as a contest of predicted numbers. Your facts may call for different questions, especially if a governmental defendant, a child, a death, a pending lawsuit, or a hard deadline is involved.
Put the Engagement Into Practice
Before handing over the file:
- Keep the written fee terms, scope of representation and responsible attorney’s name.
- Supply originals, treatment details, letters and witnesses. Include facts that may hurt the claim.
- Ask about the first evidence requests, next update and contact for insurer calls or medical changes.
- Tell the other firm you have chosen counsel. Confirm who will handle an imminent deadline.
Do not assume that the two offices have arranged the handoff.
Sources
- Texas Board of Legal Specialization, Personal Injury Trial Law certification standards
- Texas Board of Legal Specialization attorney directory
- State Bar of Texas attorney directory
- Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, current official version
- Texas Rules of Evidence, effective July 2, 2026
- Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct
- Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, Chapter 16
- Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, Chapter 33
- Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, Chapter 41
General information, not legal advice for a particular matter. Hypothetical comparisons do not promise an outcome or rank individual attorneys.
ABOUT THE ATTORNEY
Aaron A. Herbert
Founding Attorney
Board Certified in Personal Injury Trial Law
Aaron founded The Law Firm of Aaron A. Herbert in 2010 to focus on developing each client's case and seeking its maximum value. For over a decade, he has represented people seriously injured in major accidents and industrial catastrophes, pursuing trial verdicts and settlements while working to reduce the stress of litigation.
Education
- Texas A&M University · B.S., Criminal Justice, 1999
- University of Oklahoma College of Law · J.D., 2002; graduated in the top of his class
Trial experience & approach
Aaron earned numerous jury verdicts at boutique personal injury litigation firms. According to his biography, he spent a year as the top-earning litigation attorney at a firm that frequently appeared in verdict searches as having one of the highest numbers of trial wins in Texas. At another Dallas personal injury firm, he moved from managing pre-litigation attorney to managing litigation attorney over seven years as the firm grew into one of Dallas's largest personal injury firms.
His biography describes a reputation as one of America's most aggressive trial lawyers, with noteworthy recoveries from judges and juries and substantial pretrial settlements. Most of those settlements included confidentiality agreements requested by the defense. Aaron has said the recoveries were justified by the injuries and losses involved, which no amount of money could make someone choose to experience.
His approach combines passion, preparation, persistence and courtroom imagination. He believes a well-supported, engaged and motivated team working cooperatively helps deliver strong representation, with the goal of achieving the best possible result for every client.
Dallas roots, military service & publication
Born and raised in Dallas, Aaron enlisted in the United States Marine Corps after high school and later received an Honorable Discharge. He completed his university and law degrees after his military service and became a lifelong Sooners football fan in law school.
Publication: “Litigating Dog Bite Cases,” Texas Dog Law Seminar, Dallas, 2009.
Professional affiliations & recognition
Professional affiliations and recognition listed in Aaron’s biography:
- State Bar of Texas
- American Bar Association
- Association of Trial Lawyers of America (now American Association for Justice)
- Texas Trial Lawyers Association
- Dallas Trial Lawyers Association
- Dallas Bar Association
- Tarrant County Bar Association
- Million Dollar Advocates Forum
- The National Trial Lawyers – Top 100 Trial Lawyers
Trial experience & approach
Aaron earned numerous jury verdicts at boutique personal injury litigation firms. According to his biography, he spent a year as the top-earning litigation attorney at a firm that frequently appeared in verdict searches as having one of the highest numbers of trial wins in Texas. At another Dallas personal injury firm, he moved from managing pre-litigation attorney to managing litigation attorney over seven years as the firm grew into one of Dallas's largest personal injury firms.
His biography describes a reputation as one of America's most aggressive trial lawyers, with noteworthy recoveries from judges and juries and substantial pretrial settlements. Most of those settlements included confidentiality agreements requested by the defense. Aaron has said the recoveries were justified by the injuries and losses involved, which no amount of money could make someone choose to experience.
His approach combines passion, preparation, persistence and courtroom imagination. He believes a well-supported, engaged and motivated team working cooperatively helps deliver strong representation, with the goal of achieving the best possible result for every client.
Dallas roots, military service & publication
Born and raised in Dallas, Aaron enlisted in the United States Marine Corps after high school and later received an Honorable Discharge. He completed his university and law degrees after his military service and became a lifelong Sooners football fan in law school.
Publication: “Litigating Dog Bite Cases,” Texas Dog Law Seminar, Dallas, 2009.
Professional affiliations & recognition
Professional affiliations and recognition listed in Aaron’s biography:
- State Bar of Texas
- American Bar Association
- Association of Trial Lawyers of America (now American Association for Justice)
- Texas Trial Lawyers Association
- Dallas Trial Lawyers Association
- Dallas Bar Association
- Tarrant County Bar Association
- Million Dollar Advocates Forum
- The National Trial Lawyers – Top 100 Trial Lawyers