BLOG POST
Most attorneys know they should be asking clients for Google reviews. Most don't, because somewhere in the back of their mind is a half-remembered ethics rule that makes them nervous about what they can and can't say. So they default to silence, watch their competitors rack up 200+ reviews, and lose cases to firms that figured this out years ago.
The good news: you can absolutely ask clients for Google reviews without violating any bar association rule. The rules aren't designed to stop you from asking — they're designed to stop a narrow set of behaviors that most attorneys would never engage in anyway. Once you understand the actual boundaries, ethical review requests are simple.
This post walks through what the rules actually say, how to ask in a way that protects you, when to ask, what to say, and the specific phrases and tactics that get attorneys into trouble.
The relevant ABA Model Rules — and the state versions almost every jurisdiction has adopted — center on three concepts:
Truthfulness (Rule 7.1). You can't make false or misleading communications about your services. This applies to anything you publish, encourage, or republish, including testimonials. If a client's review claims you "guaranteed" a result, and you republish that review on your website without context, you may have a problem.
Solicitation and advertising (Rule 7.2 and 7.3). These rules historically governed how attorneys could advertise and solicit clients. The 2018 amendments to the Model Rules loosened many of the restrictions, but states adopted them inconsistently. The key concept that survives in most states: you cannot give "anything of value" to a person for recommending your services, with limited exceptions.
Confidentiality (Rule 1.6). This isn't directly about asking for reviews, but it shapes how you respond and what you can encourage clients to write. A review that reveals confidential information — even if the client wrote it and it's about themselves — can create complications.
That's the framework. The practical translation:
Within those guardrails, you have a lot of room to operate.
Most states track the ABA Model Rules closely, but a few have meaningful differences worth knowing if you practice there:
California has historically been one of the stricter states on attorney advertising and testimonials. Rule 7.1 in California requires that any "communication" about your services not be false or misleading, and the State Bar has specifically warned about online reviews that exaggerate results.
New York requires retention of advertising materials, including testimonials, for a defined period, and has specific disclaimer requirements for testimonials that reference past results.
Florida has detailed advertising rules and requires that testimonials touching on the quality of legal services include specific disclaimers in many cases.
Texas is generally more permissive but still prohibits compensation for reviews and false statements.
If you practice in any of these states or in another with strict advertising rules, the safest move is to read your state's Rule 7.1 directly and consult your state bar's recent ethics opinions on online reviews and testimonials. Most state bars have published guidance specifically addressing review platforms.
Regardless of jurisdiction, a few principles will keep you on the right side of every state's rules.
Ask only after the matter is resolved. Asking a client for a review during an active case creates two problems: the outcome isn't known yet (so any review is premature), and there's an implied pressure that compromises the client's independence. Wait until the matter is closed and the client knows the result.
Don't dictate the content. You can ask for a review. You can't tell the client what to say, ask them to mention specific results, or provide a script. The review must be the client's own honest assessment.
Don't ask for a specific rating. "Please leave us a 5-star review" is the single most common mistake attorneys make. It's a problem under bar rules in some states, it's a problem under FTC guidelines (which apply to all businesses), and it's a problem under Google's own terms of service. Just ask for a review and let the client decide the rating.
Don't filter who you ask. Some marketing advice tells businesses to ask only happy clients. For most businesses this is gray-area; for attorneys, selectively asking only clients you're confident will leave 5 stars can run into honesty rules. The cleaner approach is to ask everyone whose matter resolved successfully — defined by your own consistent criteria — and let the chips fall.
Make refusal easy and consequence-free. A client who doesn't want to leave a review shouldn't feel pressured. Build in a clear opt-out and never follow up more than twice.
The right moment varies dramatically by practice area.
Personal injury. Wait until the settlement check has been delivered and any liens are resolved. Don't ask at signing, don't ask when the demand letter goes out, and don't ask the day a settlement is offered. The right moment is when the client has the money in hand and the matter is fully closed.
Family law. Ask after the final decree is entered and the emotional intensity has settled. The week after a contentious custody hearing is a bad time. Two to four weeks after the matter closes, when the client has had time to live with the outcome, tends to produce more thoughtful reviews.
Criminal defense. Wait until sentencing is complete and any appeal periods have passed. For successful defenses (acquittal, dismissal, favorable plea), the right moment is shortly after disposition. Be aware that some clients won't want to publicly identify themselves as having been a criminal defendant, and you should give them the option to leave reviews under initials or first name only.
Estate planning. Ask immediately after the documents are signed and delivered. This is one of the easiest practice areas for review generation — clients have just had a positive experience, the matter is fully resolved, and there's no ongoing emotional weight.
Business and transactional. Ask after closing — the deal is done, the client has the result, and they're often relieved. For ongoing client relationships, an annual touchpoint asking for a review is appropriate.
Immigration. Wait until the visa, green card, or citizenship is granted. Asking before USCIS approval is premature, and a review written during the process can be problematic if the case later goes badly.
The actual ask should be short, professional, and easy to act on. Here are templates that work for most practice areas. Adjust the language to match your firm's voice and your state's requirements.
SMS request (post-matter):
"Hi [First Name], it was a pleasure working with you on your [matter type]. If you were satisfied with our representation, we'd appreciate your honest feedback on Google: [link]. Reply STOP to opt out."
Email request (post-matter):
Subject: A quick favor from [Firm Name]
Dear [First Name],
Thank you again for trusting our firm with your [matter type]. It was a privilege to represent you.
If you were satisfied with our work, we'd be grateful if you'd share your experience in a Google review. Honest feedback from clients helps other people in your situation find us when they need legal help.
You can leave a review here: [link]
If anything about your experience could have been better, please reply to this email — we'd rather hear it from you directly than not at all.
Thank you,[Attorney Name]
Follow-up reminder (one week later, if no review left):
"Hi [First Name], just a friendly reminder that we'd love your feedback on Google if you have a moment: [link]. No pressure if you'd rather not — and thanks again for letting us help."
A few things to notice about these templates:
That last point matters. A request that says "Thank you for trusting us with your DUI defense" identifies the matter type publicly through a text or email path the client may share or screenshot. Generic language ("your matter," "your case") is safer.
A short list of behaviors that have actually generated bar complaints, FTC scrutiny, or Google takedowns:
Offering anything of value. A $5 Starbucks card. A discount on future services. A free consultation credit. A donation to charity in the client's name. All of these have appeared in bar disciplinary cases.
Writing reviews yourself or having staff write them. This is review fraud. It violates Google's terms (which results in profile suspension), FTC rules (which can result in fines), and bar rules in every state.
Asking clients to copy a draft you provide. "Here's some language that might be helpful — feel free to use it." This isn't a review, it's a testimonial you wrote that the client is republishing under their name. Bar rules and FTC rules treat this as your speech, not theirs.
Pressuring clients during active matters. "Once you're happy with how this is going, would you mind leaving us a review?" The client doesn't yet know how it's going to turn out. Pressure during representation is a power-imbalance issue.
Requesting reviews from clients you're representing in sensitive matters where public identification could harm them. Criminal defense, family law abuse cases, immigration cases involving status concerns. Either don't ask, or give them clear options to remain anonymous.
Selectively asking only the happiest clients. This is sometimes called "review gating" when done aggressively. Asking everyone who had a successful matter resolution is fine; cherry-picking based on your guess about how they'd review you is risky territory.
Republishing reviews without proper context. A client review that mentions specific dollar amounts, percentages, or guarantees needs to be handled carefully if you republish it on your website. Most states require specific disclaimers — and some prohibit republication of certain content entirely.
The firms that consistently grow their review counts don't rely on remembering to ask. They build it into their matter-closing workflow.
A simple system looks like this:
Done well, this kind of system takes a solo attorney from 1-2 reviews per month to 5-10 per month, without requiring any additional time from the attorney or staff.
TrueReview integrates with most legal practice management platforms — including MyCase, Clio, PracticePanther, and Lawmatics — so review requests fire automatically when a matter changes status. The platform also handles the follow-up sequence, the feedback routing, and the SMS delivery without you needing to think about any of it.
You can ethically ask every client for a Google review. You can do it on every closed matter. You can build a system that does it automatically. The bar rules don't prevent any of this — they prevent a narrow set of behaviors most attorneys would never engage in anyway.
If you take three things from this post:
The firms doing this well have spent years compounding their review counts while their competitors hesitated. The good news is that compounding works in your favor too — every review you collect this month will still be working for you years from now.
For more on what to do when those reviews include the occasional negative one, see our guide on how to respond to a negative review as a lawyer without violating confidentiality.
Want to automate ethical review requests for your law firm? Start a free 14-day trial of TrueReview — built-in compliance features, integration with the legal software you already use, and a setup process that takes under 30 minutes.
This article provides general information about attorney advertising and review solicitation. It is not legal advice. Bar rules vary by state and change over time — consult your state bar's current rules and ethics opinions before implementing any review program.
.png)
