What Verdica's 796 score means for Masha M. Zhuravleva
Masha M. Zhuravleva's composite score of 796 out of 850 places her in the "strong" band (740–799), indicating a legal provider with solid regulatory standing and minimal compliance red flags based on available state bar data. This score reflects that her bar membership is in good standing, her disciplinary record is clean, and her practice profile aligns with standard expectations for Delaware attorneys.
A score in this range suggests that someone considering engaging this provider faces low regulatory risk as measured by state bar records. However, the score is not in the "excellent" band (800–850), meaning there are minor areas where her profile differs from top-tier practitioners—most likely in the practice profile dimension. This is a meaningful distinction: strong scores indicate competence and compliance, while excellent scores suggest recognized depth or breadth of practice experience. For a business owner or consumer, a 796 means you're looking at an attorney with a clean record and acceptable credentials, though you may want to supplement this regulatory data with direct references or case history before engagement.
How the sub-scores break down
Bar Standing (790/850): This reflects Masha M. Zhuravleva's current licensing status and any issues affecting her right to practice in Delaware. A score of 790 is very high and indicates active, unrestricted bar membership. Minor deductions in this category typically stem from administrative issues such as late fee payment, incomplete CLE credits, or address-of-record discrepancies—not substantive fitness problems. Her 790 score signals full authorization to practice without caveats.
Disciplinary History (850/850): A perfect score here means no formal disciplinary actions, complaints, or sanctions on record with the Delaware bar. This is the cleanest possible record: no public reprimands, suspensions, disbarments, or settled complaints. In the legal industry, a 850 disciplinary score is the baseline for trustworthiness from a regulatory standpoint. It does not confirm excellence—it confirms absence of documented misconduct.
Practice Profile (700/850): This sub-score is notably lower and represents the primary reason her composite score sits at 796 rather than 820+. Practice profile scores derive from factors such as years licensed, specialization documentation, continuing education completion rate, and historical practice patterns reported to the bar. A 700 suggests her profile is acceptable but less developed than top-tier peers. This could indicate she is early in her career, practices in a narrow or emerging specialty with limited bar-tracked credentials, or has not formally documented specialized competencies to the bar. This dimension is the most variable and least determinative of actual capability.
What regulators in DE track for legal providers
Delaware's bar disciplinary records and practice history data capture several compliance dimensions. The state bar maintains records of formal complaints (ethics violations, malpractice claims, trust account misuse, unauthorized practice), licensing status (active, inactive, suspended, disbarred), and CLE compliance. Practice history includes admission date, bar ID, address, and whether an attorney has filed practice area declarations or applied for certification in specialized fields.
Infractions that lower scores include violation of professional conduct rules (commingling funds, neglecting client matters, dishonesty), failure to respond to bar inquiries, and non-payment of bar fees. Licensing lapses or administrative suspensions also register as red flags. Conversely, clean disciplinary records, current licensure, and consistent compliance with bar reporting requirements maintain or raise scores. The practice profile dimension uses bar-reported data on specialization and credentials, so attorneys who formally register specialties or maintain current certification in defined practice areas typically see higher scores in this sub-category.
Bottom line
Masha M. Zhuravleva presents a strong regulatory profile with no disciplinary history and active bar standing, making her a low-risk choice from a compliance perspective. Before engagement, verify her practice experience directly through references or case history, since her practice profile score suggests her bar-documented credentials are competent but not exceptionally extensive.