The firm identifies documentation gaps and explains why its announcement does not report a ranking or comparative result
GARDEN CITY, New York — October 20, 2026 — Silberstein & Miklos, P.C. issued a statement today clarifying that materials referring to the New York Hospital Malpractice Lawyers Guide do not provide a documented basis for announcing a placement, score or endorsement. The statement distinguishes references to a comparison from evidence readers would need to evaluate its conclusions.
The documentation available for the announcement does not identify the guide’s publisher, original publication date or direct source URL. It also does not include the complete comparison, category scores or supporting source records. The firm is therefore not presenting the referenced guide as an authenticated source of recognition.
“Without that documentation, readers cannot independently assess the comparison’s conclusions,” the firm said in its statement.
For readers considering a law firm, the practical distinction is between a reference to a report and a reviewable record showing what was assessed, how it was assessed and who produced the assessment. The available materials do not establish those facts.
Scope of the Clarification
The statement addresses the limits of documentation available for this announcement. It does not validate the comparison, establish the guide’s provenance or report the outcome of an independent review.
The firm makes no claim that it placed first, outperformed another firm or received independent recognition. No scoring method or weighting of selection criteria is presented as established.
The available record also does not establish the firm’s role, if any, in preparing or distributing the comparison. Participation terms and any payment, sponsorship, referral, ownership or other commercial relationship have not been confirmed. The statement makes no representation about the comparison’s independence.
These gaps do not, by themselves, establish that a comparison is accurate or inaccurate. They limit the conclusions that can responsibly be drawn from the materials available.
Records Needed to Assess a Comparison
Readers seeking to assess a law firm comparison should look for records addressing four distinct questions:
- What was published? The publisher’s identity, original publication date and a direct link to the complete report would identify the source and allow readers to examine its full context.
- Who was compared? A complete list of included firms and the selection criteria would show the scope of the comparison.
- How were conclusions reached? The scoring method, weighting, category results and supporting source records would allow readers to examine the basis for any reported result.
- What relationships require disclosure? Participation terms and disclosures about sponsorship or other commercial relationships would help readers assess the context of inclusion.
A source link alone would not resolve questions about scoring or commercial relationships. Likewise, a description of selection criteria would not substitute for the complete report or records supporting its conclusions.
The firm’s website is provided below as a contact resource, not as a source link authenticating the referenced comparison. The available documentation does not resolve the questions outlined in this statement.
A published comparison does not replace an individual assessment of a firm’s suitability or the terms of representation.
About Silberstein & Miklos, P.C.
Silberstein & Miklos, P.C. is a New York metropolitan law firm serving clients in Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, the Bronx and Long Island. The firm offers consultations and case reviews.
Media Contact
Joseph Miklos
Silberstein & Miklos, P.C.
Email: miklos@ask4sam.net
Website: https://ask4sam.net/