Working at the source means going to the body that published your record rather than to the search engine that lists it. Our main guide explains why that distinction matters. This page covers what actually happens once you have chosen that route, because the sequence is not obvious and the delays are predictable.
Six companies do this work. What follows is the order it runs in, what each stage needs from you, and the point at which it usually stalls.
Stage one: establishing the disposition
Nothing begins until the firm knows how your case ended, because the disposition determines which argument is available.
You will be asked for the docket number, the county and court that heard the matter, and the final order. If you do not have the order, the clerk of that court will provide a certified copy, usually for a small fee, and you should request it before your first call rather than after. Firms wait on this document more than on anything else.
A dismissal, an acquittal or a nolle prosequi entry gives the strongest position. A conviction that stands gives the weakest. A sealed or expunged case sits between the two, because the order exists but private sites have not been told about it.
Stage two: identifying who actually publishes each copy
This stage surprises people. The court published the original, but the copies on background check sites were taken by companies with no relationship to the court and no obligation to watch what it does later.
A competent firm will build a list of every site holding a copy before quoting. If a firm quotes before doing that, the quote covers an unknown quantity of work.
You can do this yourself in advance and it makes every quote more accurate. Search your full name with the county name, then your name with the charge, then your name alone. Record each domain and the date shown on the listing.
Stage three: the request itself
Each site has its own process, and there is no standard. Some publish a removal form. Some require a written request with the certified order attached. Some respond only to correspondence from an attorney, which is the practical reason the law firms in this group have an advantage that agencies do not.
Two things determine the response. Whether the record is legally required to remain public, and whether the site has an incentive to comply. A background check service selling data has a commercial reason to keep it. A local news aggregator that scraped a booking feed usually does not care.
Stage four: where it stalls
Three stalls account for most delay, and none of them is the firm being slow.
- The certified order has not arrived. Clerks take weeks in some counties. Request it first.
- A site has no working contact. Aggregators go dormant while their pages stay indexed. Where nobody answers, the route shifts to de-indexing or suppression, and that changes the price.
- A copy appears that nobody counted. A record removed from eight sites can resurface on a ninth that scraped it before the removal. This is why monitoring is quoted separately and why it is worth buying.
Stage five: clearing the listings
A removed page can keep appearing in search for several weeks. Clearing the listing is a separate request from removing the page. Ask whether it is included in your quote, because it is the step most often left out and the one that makes the work visible to you.
The six companies that work this way
Minc Law
An internet defamation firm in Cleveland, founded 2018, litigating in 26 states and 5 countries. Strongest at the request stage because correspondence from a law firm changes how a publisher reads it. Needs the certified order and the site list. Bills on retainer.
National Security Law Firm
A Washington DC firm working in all 50 states, charging a flat 3,000 dollars per article or listing and refunding in full where the item is not removed. The only pricing here that maps cleanly onto stage two: once you know how many copies exist, you know the cost. That is also the constraint, because a record on fifteen sites prices accordingly.
Kohrman Jackson and Krantz
A content removal and internet defamation group inside a business firm whose roots run to 1918. The reason to select this shape is a record attached to a live dispute, where the same firm can act on both rather than coordinating with separate counsel.
RM Warner Law
A Scottsdale firm with more than a decade in this work, offering cease and desist correspondence through to court ordered removal. On the public record: in 2018 the State Bar of Arizona investigated the partners over lawsuits naming apparently fictitious defendants, and two attorneys were disciplined. Ask about it at stage one.
Reputation Resolutions
An agency rather than a firm, founded 2013 in Colorado, accredited with the Better Business Bureau since 2014. Removal work runs pay for performance, which suits stage three, where the outcome per site is genuinely uncertain. Independent review volume is thin, roughly three verified reviews on Clutch and one on the BBB.
Top Shelf Reputation
Our own service, described by us. We work the sequence above on court records, arrest records and the aggregator copies that follow them. We ask for the certified order at stage one and we build the site list at stage two before quoting, because quoting before that is guesswork.
We are not a law firm. Where a site responds only to counsel, or where the record needs a court order to move at all, that is a referral rather than something we can do. We also publish no pricing, so you cannot compare us to the flat fee above without a call.
What to have ready before your first call
- The docket number and the court that heard the case.
- A certified copy of the final order, or the clerk’s request already submitted.
- Your list of every site currently showing the record, with dates.
- A note of whether the case was dismissed, sealed, expunged or stands.
A firm that receives all four on the first call can quote accurately. A firm that quotes without asking for any of them is quoting a guess, and the number will move.
Reference
| Company | Type | Pricing | Acts on counsel-only sites |
|---|---|---|---|
 Minc Law |
Law firm | Retainer | Yes |
 National Security Law Firm |
Law firm | 3,000 per item, refunded on failure | Yes |
 Kohrman Jackson and Krantz |
Law firm | Retainer | Yes |
 RM Warner Law |
Law firm | On request | Yes |
 Reputation Resolutions |
Agency | Pay for performance | No |
 Top Shelf Reputation |
Agency | On request | No |
Working notes on individual courts and aggregators are in the blog. If you want the site list built for you before you decide anything, that is what a case review covers.
Last updated on July 28, 2026