What Verdica's 796 score means for Daniel Kim
Daniel Kim's composite score of 796 places him in Verdica's "strong" performance band (740–799), indicating a legal provider with solid compliance standing and minimal red flags based on available regulatory data. This score reflects a track record that aligns with professional standards set by Colorado's bar authorities and suggests low regulatory risk relative to the broader population of licensed attorneys.
The 796 score is derived from three regulatory dimensions: bar standing, disciplinary history, and practice profile. The weighting of these factors reflects what state bar systems and consumer protection frameworks typically prioritize—whether an attorney maintains active licensure, whether they have faced formal complaints or sanctions, and whether their practice profile shows signs of operational stability or risk.
A reader considering Daniel Kim's services should interpret this score as indicating a provider without major compliance concerns on public record. The absence of indexed customer reviews means this analysis is based solely on regulator-maintained data, not client feedback. For businesses or individuals vetting legal service providers, this score suggests Kim merits serious consideration, though it does not substitute for direct reference checks, case review, or consultation with prior clients.
How the sub-scores break down
Bar Standing (790): This sub-score reflects the status of Kim's license to practice law in Colorado. A score of 790 indicates active, valid licensure with no material lapse or suspension. In the legal industry, bar standing is a binary-adjacent measure—an attorney either holds a license in good standing or does not. The score of 790 (rather than a perfect 850) likely reflects minor administrative factors tracked by state bars, such as timely renewal compliance or continuing legal education status, rather than license revocation or suspension.
Disciplinary History (850): This is a perfect sub-score, indicating no formal disciplinary actions, complaints, or sanctions indexed in Colorado's bar disciplinary records. In practice, this dimension tracks complaints filed by clients or opposing counsel, investigations by state bar counsel, and any resulting sanctions ranging from admonition to disbarment. A perfect score means Kim has not faced publicly recorded discipline through this channel. This is a strong indicator of compliance with professional conduct rules.
Practice Profile (700): This sub-score is the lowest of the three, suggesting some factor in Kim's practice history or operational profile falls short of the "strong" or "excellent" band. Practice profile typically encompasses metrics such as years of practice, types of legal work, office history, and any patterns visible in public records. A score of 700 is still within the "acceptable" range and does not indicate misconduct; rather, it may reflect a newer practice, a less diverse service offering, limited public practice history, or other structural factors that regulators track to assess operational maturity or scope.
What regulators in CO track for legal providers
Colorado's state bar maintains disciplinary records that form the backbone of Verdica's compliance scoring. The bar investigates complaints alleging violations of the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct, which cover competence, conflicts of interest, fee disputes, client communication, and misuse of client funds. Infractions range from minor (admonition) to severe (suspension or disbarment).
State bar systems also track licensing status—whether an attorney has current admission, whether they have taken voluntary inactive status, and whether they maintain required continuing legal education. Practice history visible in public records includes office locations, bar admissions in other states, and any public actions or disclosures.
These regulatory measures do not assess legal skill, client satisfaction, or case outcomes directly; they focus on licensing compliance, disciplinary history, and structural compliance with professional standards. A high score indicates an attorney has cleared these regulatory hurdles without major incidents.
Bottom line
Daniel Kim scores in the "strong" range with no disciplinary history and active bar standing, indicating low regulatory risk. Anyone considering his services should cross-check his practice focus and experience directly, since the practice profile sub-score suggests room for clarification about his specific expertise or operational depth.