What Verdica's 796 score means for Ben Coughlan
Ben Coughlan's composite score of 796 out of 850 places him in the "strong" band (740–799), indicating a legal provider with solid regulatory standing and minimal compliance concerns. This score is built from publicly available state bar records and practice history data, meaning it reflects what regulators and licensing bodies have documented about his professional conduct and credentials.
A score in this range suggests that Coughlan meets the baseline requirements for practice in DC and has maintained that standing without major red flags. Readers should interpret this as a provider with a track record unlikely to expose them to unusual regulatory or disciplinary risk. However, the score stops short of "excellent" (800–850), which means there are either minor compliance notes, modest limitations in practice profile breadth, or other factors that regulators track that keep him just below the highest tier. For most business owners or individuals seeking legal services, a 796 score signals a reasonable choice—but they should still conduct their own vetting, ask references, and confirm the provider's specific expertise matches their need.
How the sub-scores break down
Bar Standing (790/850): This sub-score reflects whether Coughlan holds an active license and what his status is with the DC bar. A score of 790 is strong but not perfect, suggesting his license is in good standing with no current suspensions or restrictions on his practice. In the legal field, bar standing is the foundational credential—without it, a provider cannot legally practice. A score near the top of this dimension indicates no active licensing concerns.
Disciplinary History (850/850): This is a perfect sub-score, meaning there are no disciplinary actions, complaints upheld against him, or sanctions recorded in DC bar records. In regulatory terms, a clean disciplinary history is the single strongest indicator of professional compliance. This tells readers that no governing body has found him in violation of ethics rules, conduct standards, or professional responsibilities. A perfect score here is meaningful and worth noting.
Practice Profile (700/850): This sub-score is the lowest of the three and relates to the breadth, depth, and transparency of his practice history as recorded in bar directories and regulatory filings. A score of 700 (in the "acceptable" range) suggests that while his practice is documented and legitimate, there may be limited detail about his experience areas, client base size, or public visibility compared to peers. This might indicate a smaller or more specialized practice, less detailed bar profile information, or fewer years in documented practice. It does not suggest risk; rather, it reflects incomplete or narrower professional documentation.
What regulators in DC track for legal providers
DC's bar association maintains disciplinary records and tracks compliance through several mechanisms. Regulators record any complaints filed against attorneys, investigations opened, and sanctions imposed—ranging from reprimands to suspension or disbarment. They also monitor continuing legal education requirements, bar membership status, and changes in practice authorization.
Practice history data includes information from bar directories, malpractice insurance claims (in some jurisdictions), and public court filings. Regulators focus on whether an attorney maintains required insurance, meets ethical obligations around client funds and confidentiality, avoids conflicts of interest, and responds promptly to bar inquiries. Quality measures are indirect: licensing body records don't typically include client satisfaction data, but they do flag neglect of cases, failure to communicate, and breaches of professional duty. Verdica's scoring reflects what these public sources reveal—so a high score means regulators have documented no serious misconduct.
Bottom line
Ben Coughlan's 796 score indicates a provider with strong bar standing and a clean disciplinary record, making him a low-risk choice from a regulatory perspective. Before engaging his services, confirm his specific practice areas align with your needs and consider requesting client references or case examples, since the score does not capture client satisfaction or specialized expertise depth.