Avvo Acquisition Poised to Grow Online Legal Services
Avvo's recent acquisition by Internet Brands puts the company in a position to expand its service offerings—even the controversial ones.
January 17, 2018 at 10:46 AM
4 minute read
Avvo Legal Services. |
Venture capitalists have long predicted the “disruptive” potential and massive earnings to be found around online legal services technology. Consumer-facing online legal services providers like Avvo, LegalZoom, and Rocket Lawyer have attracted some of the most impressive venture funding in the legal technology space to date in spite of a number of red flags and roadblocks raised by state courts and bar associations about potential ethics violations posed by such companies.
Avvo's recent announcement that it would be acquired by online media and e-commerce company Internet Brands seems like the next big indication that investors are right. Avvo will now sit alongside online legal brands like Lawyers.com, Nolo and Martindale-Hubbell, as well as nonlegal brands like WebMD, under the Internet Brands umbrella.
Avvo will continue to operate as its own brand and does not anticipate any major leadership changes. The deal has not yet been finalized, and terms of the acquisition were not made public.
Avvo CEO Mark Britton said that Avvo has considered a number of different investors and operating companies over the years, but found some difficulty in finding business partners that had a sense of online business trends within the legal vertical.
“Nothing ever really swayed us from our standalone path until Internet Brands. They are different because they've got a real commitment to legal. They get legal. It's hard to find people, investors, operating companies that get legal, that enjoy legal and are really focused on a mission of helping legal consumers and also helping lawyers,” he said.
Britton pointed specifically to the breadth of Internet Brands' consumer-facing online legal services companies. Some of Internet Brands' legal companies focus on do-it-yourself legal documents, others on business development for attorneys, and others on finding and retaining an attorney.
To date, Avvo's offerings have also spanned that spectrum. The company offers document templates for consumers who want to prepare some of their own filings, short consultation services like Avvo Advisor, all the way up to packaged bespoke legal services across a number of different practice areas.
“Serving consumers across that entire spectrum, while it is a noble endeavor, it's also really hard. You just have such a broad range of consumers with different needs,” Britton said of the company's services thus far.
Britton hopes that the acquisition will help Avvo tap into the expertise of Internet Brands' legal brands. “We're trying to do it all right now. Maybe we would be better off having Nolo driving some of the do-it-yourself stuff, and we incorporate some of their forms on our site,” Britton offered as an example, adding that similar opportunities likely exist for many of Internet Brands' companies in legal.
Those plans have not been formalized yet, but they seem to be in the works. A spokesperson for Internet Brands said the company was “already hard at work with the Avvo management team on future initiatives” but did not disclose any specific plans. Britton hinted that the company is looking to roll out some business development tools for attorneys in the future but did not offer specifics.
There are also places where some of Internet Brands' nonlegal companies may inform Avvo's strategy moving forward. “A lot of what WebMD is trying to solve in medical is what we're trying to solve in legal,” Britton noted.
Some of Avvo's services have sparked controversy at the state level, notably its Avvo Advisor service and other bespoke legal service products, but Britton does not anticipate that the acquisition will change the company's strategy for those services. “In our packaged legal services products, Avvo Advisor, anything we've done that has led to different conversations with state bar associations, those needs will never go away and will continue to evolve,” he said.
For now, Britton said that Avvo's acquisition deal isn't likely to rock the boat in the online legal services market. “It's business as usual right now,” he noted. That may not be true for long, however.
“The deal gives us a level of diversification, which leads to stability. With that stability we can continue to innovate on behalf of consumers and attorneys,” Britton said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Restoring Trust in the Courts Starts in New York
- 2'Pull Back the Curtain': Ex-NFL Players Seek Discovery in Lawsuit Over League's Disability Plan
- 3Tensions Run High at Final Hearing Before Manhattan Congestion Pricing Takes Effect
- 4Improper Removal to Fed. Court Leads to $100K Bill for Blue Cross Blue Shield
- 5Michael Halpern, Beloved Key West Attorney, Dies at 72
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250