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 risk based on available state bar data. This score reflects performance across three dimensions: bar standing, disciplinary history, and practice profile. A score in this range suggests that a provider has maintained active licensure, avoided major regulatory sanctions, and operates within expected professional norms as tracked by the District of Columbia bar.
Readers should interpret this as a baseline indicator of regulatory compliance health, not a guarantee of service quality or outcome. The score is built on objective, third-party data—state bar records—rather than subjective measures like client satisfaction. No independent customer reviews are currently indexed for this entity, so the composite score represents only the compliance picture. Someone considering engaging Masha M. Zhuravleva should view this score as a passing compliance checkpoint and supplement it with direct reference checks, fee discussions, and case-specific vetting.
How the sub-scores break down
Bar Standing (790/850): This sub-score reflects Masha M. Zhuravleva's current active status and good standing with the District of Columbia bar. A score in the upper range indicates the provider holds a valid license and is authorized to practice law. The slight deduction from perfect (790 vs. 850) may reflect minor administrative matters, fee issues, or non-disciplinary record flags that the bar tracks but that do not rise to formal sanction. In the legal industry, bar standing is a foundational requirement; anything below 700 would signal active concerns about licensure eligibility.
Disciplinary History (850/850): This is a perfect sub-score, indicating no formal disciplinary actions, complaints, or sanctions recorded in state bar records within the scope of Verdica's data. A perfect disciplinary score means the DC bar has not initiated or concluded any formal proceedings against this provider for professional misconduct, fraud, incompetence, or ethics violations. This is a significant positive signal and suggests a clean compliance record.
Practice Profile (700/850): This sub-score, the lowest of the three, reflects patterns in how the provider conducts their practice—areas such as client trust account management, continuing legal education compliance, insurance or bonding status, and other operational metrics tracked by state bars. A score of 700 is still within acceptable range (670–739) but sits at the threshold. This may indicate minor gaps in documentation, reporting, or administrative practice standards, though not violations serious enough to trigger discipline. It warrants a closer look into operational controls if you are considering a long-term engagement.
What regulators in DC track for legal providers
The District of Columbia bar maintains disciplinary records and practice history data that form the backbone of Verdica's scoring. Regulators track formal complaints, investigative findings, and sanctioning decisions—ranging from disbarment and suspension at the severe end, to reprimand and restitution orders at the moderate end. The bar also monitors bar membership fees, continuing legal education requirements, and mandatory trust account audits or other financial controls.
Key compliance metrics that move scores up or down include:
- Active, timely license renewal and fee payment
- Absence of disciplinary investigations or complaints
- Adherence to client trust account rules and record-keeping
- Compliance with ethics rules (conflicts of interest, confidentiality, candor)
- Completion of mandatory professional development
A provider with a lower score might have outstanding fee arrears, a closed or pending investigation, a history of trust account deficiencies, or prior sanctions. Verdica does not invent risk; the scoring reflects what regulators have documented.
Bottom line
Masha M. Zhuravleva scores in the strong regulatory range with clean disciplinary history and active bar standing. Before engaging, verify references, confirm fee arrangements in writing, and confirm the specific scope of work aligns with her practice area—the compliance score tells you she is not a regulatory red flag, but it does not substitute for due diligence on fit and capability.