Two very high level law firms in bodily damage continues …

Insurance people are tired of hearing about law firms in bodily injury after these “gourmet insurance companies” could want a seat by the ring for it. Two law firms in bodily damage from the Boston region continue for allegations of secret commercial flight, a violation of loyalty, conspiracy, unfair competition and more.

One company accuses the other of stealing its commercial model which was the key to its national success. The other insists on the fact that he stole nothing, and he would never deal like the accuser.

In a corner is Sokolove Law, who, in the 1980s, was among the first law firms to advertise television and use a telephone number at no cost. The company has represented thousands of customers across the country and has recovered more than $ 10 billion over decades. Sokolove is now made up of 64 employees and more than 140 coconsil companies.

“This case concerns the wholesale flight of a commercial model,” said Sokolove in his first Salvo filed on August 13. Sokolove argues that its competitor Jason Stone Buthury Lawyers has built its recent success “not on innovation or hard work, but on trade secrets and proprietary information” stolen from Sokolove.

In the other corner are the lawyers of Jason Stone Bleshing and Keith Glover, a former Sokolove employee who went to work for Stone in 2017 and who, according to Sokolove, took with him the “secret sauce” behind the success of Sokolove when he left Sokolove in 2015.

Jason Stone claims that his business model is nothing like Sokolove that Stone supports is more a telemarketing and lead production firm than a traditional law firm like his. Stone alleges that Sokolove’s trial is part of an unfair campaign that Sokolove has faced his business.

Former employee

Sokolove postulates that the so-called program was orchestrated by Glover, a former mattress seller who, Sokolove, says that he was formed to become a six-digit legal operations professional. Glover “has reimbursed this confidence” by allegedly copying the SOKOLOVE digital operations game book and by delivering it to Stone when he became director of operations at Stone eight years ago, according to Sokolove’s trial.

Sokolove has built its business to accommodate other companies in the country looking for it as coconsil to benefit from its marketing, case, customer service and complaint management processes. Sokolove has made a name for itself locally in car accidents and nationally in cases of mesothelioma, but its portfolio also includes many other types of body injuries.

Sokolove operates a distant call center with more than 100 agents which are continuously trained in new types of cases such as birth injuries, denial of disability, fire fighting foam, lung cancer, mistreatment of nursing homes, dangerous drugs, work injuries and other marketing campaigns. For training, Sokolove uses a combination of intake scripts, PowerPoint presentations, quiz and links to internal documents. Sokolove has four private google sites for internal use to support your business.

Internal documents

Sokolove alleys that despite the confidentiality, non-collication and non-competition agreements, Glover copied the website manager’s website containing documents on internal procedures such as customer contribution; training for employees of the call center; business presentations; And the formulas used to measure performance and organize and report data.

According to Sokolove, Glover has also stolen from brand documents, including models of documents used in more than 50 marketing campaigns. Sokolove argues that Glover admitted to having taken this information but said that the materials were only “models” without value.

The alleged flight to Glover and the illegal use of SOKOLOVE confidential information “reduced the value of stolen information” and permitted to the stone law firm to “develop and maintain cases at the expense of Sokolove”, according to the trial.

Stone Counterst

Stone contradicts, accusing Sokolove of unfair and deceptive practices and wondering if Sokolove’s model and business practices meet professional standards.

Stone represents customers who have undergone bodily injuries caused by vehicle collisions, abuses and injuries from nursing houses and sliding and falling incidents. Stone claims to employ 13 lawyers in the state. Sokolove, however, argues that Stone has gone from around 20 people in two offices, to around 54 people in six offices since 2017 when Glover joined.

According to Stone, Glover had Sokolove’s permission to access files on his personal computer when he left Sokolove 10 years ago. Stone also argues that he did not use any of Sokolove’s trade secrets in his operations.

Stone also maintains that the two companies had a privacy agreement at the beginning of 2025 under which Stone agreed to show Sokolove how different the business model is different and that Stone was using none of Sokolove’s information. Stone claims that Sokolove used this agreement as a pretext for obtaining information for his trial against Stone.

Stone argues that Sokolove has not been able to show a specific commercial secret or confidential information that Stone would have used, but Sokolove cost stone affairs by denigrating the company to potential customers by saying that Stone works like Sokolove.

How companies differ

Stone describes how he thinks that the two companies differ in their commercial models. Unlike Sokolove, Stone says that it does not work as a call center or leads a reference program as the company’s main objective.

“Sokolove’s law is involved in a complex network of telemarketing and marketing companies which focus on drawing potential customers with representations on its great national practice while all the time, providing to refer the prospects that it generates to various small businesses of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and in the country, that the customer could otherwise choose” Sokolove’s business model.

“Consequently, the Sokolove Law’s business model largely depends on telemarketing call center staff, rather than practicing lawyers, who make this bait and a routine switch,” said Stone.

Stone maintains that Sokolove has only one lawyer who practices Massachusetts law and that Sokolove is associated with several entities, including consumer acquisition solutions, digital strategies and an abuse of nursing homes as part of its marketing operations.

Stone also highlights how their sources of income would vary. According to Stone, unlike Sokolove, more than 97% of Stone’s revenues come from the representation of customers rather than refer them. Stone generates less than 3% of its income from customers referenced to other companies. On the other hand, Sokolove generates everything or almost all of its income from its generation of leads, says Stone in the complaint.

According to the pursuit, there are other ways of broadcasting from Stone de Sokolove: Stone and his lawyers appear regularly in court and supervise their belongings for customers, while Sokolove lawyers rarely do so; Stone largely focuses on bodily injuries caused by vehicle collisions, injuries to nursing homes and sliding and falling cases – are where it contributes directly, while Sokolove is largely known for mesothelioma and other mass tort questions; And Stone focuses on local or regional advertising, while Sokolove mainly uses national advertising, but not entirely.

Unfair competition

Stone argues that Sokolove’s business model represents unfair competition by distorting the “nature, quality and source of real and potential legal services” and that it diverts customers from Stone’s injuries as the most serious competitor of the State in areas where the two companies compete.

Stone alleges that with its presence in state growth, since the beginning of 2025, Sokolove has “engaged in manifest threats” on Stone’s marketing practices, denigrating Stone by falsely declaring that Stone is committed to the same Telemarketing model as Sokolove.

Following Sokolove’s alleged unfair competition, Stone claims to have lost millions of dollars in market share that he would not have lost if Sokolove had made honest disclosure for potential customers on his business model. “Naturally, adequately informed potential customers would not hire a telemarketing firm when looking for a lawyer or a law firm,” said Stone.

Companies are looking for injunctions and damage.

Subjects
Prosecution numbers