A useful client review of a lawyer describes the process rather than the verdict: how fast the firm answered, whether the fee matched the estimate, whether the client understood what was happening at each stage. The lawyer review examples below are all written that way. A review that recites a result is riskier for the firm that republishes it, because the ABA's Model Rule 7.1 treats a truthful statement as misleading when it leads a reasonable person to expect the same outcome in their own case.

For firms, the difficult part is asking, checking what your obligations allow, and replying without confirming that the person was ever a client. If you are writing a review, skip to the short section below. Every firm, lawyer and client named below is invented.

What a good lawyer review looks like

A good lawyer review names the person who did the work, says what kind of matter it was in general terms, and gives one specific detail about how the firm handled it: the call returned the same day, the fee estimate that held. Three or four sentences is enough. It does not need to mention the outcome, and it is usually better if it does not.

The next reader wants four details.

1. The name of the lawyer or the paralegal. Clients choose a person, not a letterhead.
2. The type of matter, loosely described. "Conveyancing" tells the next reader enough. A file number, a court, or the other side's name tells them far too much.
3. One process detail: response time, fee transparency, how a hard conversation was handled.
4. Recency. A review written the week the file closed carries detail the same client cannot recall a year later.

You cannot ask for any of that in a script. Google's prohibited and restricted content policy requires that contributions "reflect a genuine experience at a place or business", and drafting the words for someone is the fastest way to lose the review.

10 lawyer review examples

Grouped by practice area, because what a client notices depends on what they came in for. Ten clients, ten firms.

Conveyancing and property

Settlement was three weeks out when the building report came back badly and I had no idea what my options were. Priya at Harrow & Finn talked me through all three on the phone that afternoon and put the same thing in writing an hour later. The invoice was within fifty dollars of the estimate she gave me in the first meeting.

We bought from interstate and never met anyone at Saltmarsh Conveyancing in person. Everything came through email with a plain summary at the top and the actual documents underneath, which is the only reason I understood any of it.

The first names a person and a moment. The second names neither and works anyway, because it says exactly how the firm communicated. Neither mentions what the property sold for, which is the detail that turns a review into an advertisement.

Wills, estates and probate

My mother's estate took fourteen months and Torrance & Loew never once made me feel like I was chasing them. Every time I called, whoever picked up could see where the file was up to.

I put off making a will for nine years because I assumed it would be complicated and expensive. At Pellow & Crane it was two appointments and a fixed fee that was quoted before the first one.

Estate clients worry about cost and about being forgotten. Both answer that, and neither mentions a beneficiary or a sum.

Family law

Idlewood Family Law were the third firm I spoke to and the first who told me plainly which parts of what I wanted were realistic. That was not what I wanted to hear and it saved me a lot of money.

Tom at Vance & Muir was calm on the days I was not. He explained the process each time and never charged me for the phone calls where I was just upset.

Family law reviews are the ones most likely to identify a client, a child or the other party. Both are specific about the firm and vague about the matter, which is the shape to hope for.

Employment

I went to Tarrant & Bly expecting to be talked into a fight and instead got a one-page summary of what a fight would cost and how long it would take. I decided not to run it. That advice was worth the fee on its own.

Hollick & Deane took my call on a Friday afternoon and had a letter drafted by Monday. I have never had a professional service move that fast.

Criminal and traffic

I did not know what to expect and Quillan & Roe explained every step before it happened, including the parts that were going to be unpleasant. Nobody talked down to me.

Sana at Odell & Bray returned my call at nine at night on the day I was charged. Whatever else happens, I will not forget that.

Neither example says what the charge was or how it ended. A criminal client who names the offence in a review has published something permanent about themselves, and a firm that coaches that wording owns part of the problem.

How do I write a good review for my lawyer?

If you are the client rather than the firm, write three or four sentences: who acted for you, roughly what kind of matter it was, one specific thing they did well or badly, and how clear the fees were. Leave out the other side's name, any file or court reference, the amount involved, and anything still running.

The rest of this page is for the practice.

When to ask a client for a review

The moment is the end of the retainer, not the middle of it. A client with a live matter depends on you, and a request that arrives while they are waiting on advice reads as pressure whether you meant it that way or not. It is also why the New York State Bar Association's Ethics Opinion 1286, issued 29 September 2025, is framed around former clients: the solicitation rules it works through do not bite the same way once the representation has ended.

Two triggers, and most firms already record both. The closing letter has gone out, so the client has just read a summary of what you did. And the final invoice is settled, because asking for a public endorsement while somebody is querying your bill is a conversation nobody wants.

Ask from the person who ran the file, by name, in one short message with the review link in it. Send one follow-up a few days later and then stop. Ask on every closed matter, not only the ones you expect to go well. There is no rating step in front of the review link, and there should never be one.

The exception is the matter where a public review would identify the client. Opinion 1286 makes that point about immigration work, where a review can expose a client's identity or case details to authorities. The same logic covers family law, criminal defence and anything under a suppression order. When in doubt, do not ask.

Doing that by hand across several offices is where it falls over. Reputation management for professional services runs the same discipline off the systems you already have: the ask goes out when Xero marks the invoice paid or the matter moves stage in your CRM, and a client with three matters is one contact asked once. Anyone who reviewed you in the last 90 days is skipped, and follow-ups stop the moment the review lands.

What the rules allow when you ask for reviews

Conduct rules are set by jurisdiction and none of this is legal advice. Check your own regulator first. What follows is what the model rules and two published ethics opinions say, sources linked so you can take them to whoever signs off your marketing.

You may ask. Nothing in the ABA Model Rules prohibits asking a client for an honest review. NYSBA Opinion 1286 puts it directly: a lawyer may ask a former client to write a Google review of the lawyer's services.

You may not write it for them. Opinion 1286 conditions the whole permission on the lawyer not drafting the review. Model Rule 7.1 sits behind that: a review the firm wrote is a communication by the firm dressed up as a communication by a client.

Payment is where jurisdictions diverge, so read yours. Model Rule 7.2(b) bars compensating anyone for recommending your services, with a carve-out at 7.2(b)(5) for "nominal gifts as an expression of appreciation that are neither intended nor reasonably expected to be a form of compensation". Opinion 1286 allows a gift on that footing. Give nothing anyway, because two other rules land on top. The FTC's Consumer Reviews and Testimonials Rule, in force since 21 October 2024, prohibits incentives conditioned on a review expressing a particular sentiment, and Google bars merchants from offering "payment, discounts, free goods and/or services" in exchange for one. A gift your state permits can still get the review filtered off your profile.

Results are the advertising trap, not the reviews themselves. Comment [3] to Model Rule 7.1 says a communication that truthfully reports a lawyer's achievements may still be misleading if it leads a reasonable person to expect the same results "without reference to the specific factual and legal circumstances of each client's case". A client can write whatever they like. Pull that review onto your website and it stops being a review you host and becomes a testimonial you publish, which the FTC treats differently.

Outside the United States the wording changes. The principle does not. In Australia, rule 36 of the Australian Solicitors' Conduct Rules, made by the Legal Services Council, requires a solicitor or principal to ensure that any advertising, marketing or promotion connected with the practice is not false, misleading or deceptive. Marketing is the operative word, and a testimonial on your homepage is marketing.

Never suppress or filter. The FTC's guidance says you cannot suggest that reviews "must be positive (or negative) in order to obtain a promised incentive", even implicitly. Asking only the clients you expect to be pleased is not banned by the rule on its face. Google is blunter: merchants may not "discourage or prohibit negative reviews, or selectively solicit positive reviews from customers". It is visible from outside anyway, and it teaches you nothing.

How to reply to a review without confirming anyone was a client

This is harder for a law firm than for any other business, and it is why many firms reply to nothing at all.

The duty is Model Rule 1.6(a): a lawyer "shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client" without informed consent. There is a self-defence exception at 1.6(b)(5), and the ABA has already ruled that a bad review does not open it. Formal Opinion 496, issued 13 January 2021, holds that a negative online review on its own does not meet the requirements for disclosure in self-defence, and that even if it did, an online response revealing information about the representation would exceed what the rule permits. The North Carolina State Bar landed in the same place in its 2020 Formal Ethics Opinion 1, adopted 16 July 2021: what a lawyer may post is "a professional and restrained response that does not reveal any confidential information".

Notice what that rules out. Correcting a factual error nearly always requires you to reveal something about the matter, and even "we acted for you for eight months and you never raised this" confirms the representation and its length. Opinion 496 offers a sample reply for when there is nothing safe to say: "Professional obligations do not allow me to respond as I would wish." Bleak, and it works. Your reply has to hold up whether the reviewer is a former client, a relative of one, or a stranger.

A detailed positive review

Thank you for taking the time to write this, and for mentioning Priya by name. The whole team reads these.

A short five-star review with no detail

Thank you. It means a lot to everyone here.

A complaint about fees

We take any concern about our billing seriously. Our professional obligations mean we cannot discuss an individual matter in a public forum. Our practice manager is on 03 5550 0000 and will look into it properly.

An angry review alleging the firm did nothing

We are sorry to read this. We do not discuss any individual matter publicly, and we do not confirm or deny whether a person has been a client of the firm. Anyone with a concern about our service can write to our principal at feedback@example.com and we will respond.

The last one is the template. It says nothing, and saying nothing is the point. It also reads to the next prospective client as a firm that keeps confidences under provocation, which is the only argument you get to make there.

For replies at length, our positive review response examples cover the general case. If a review names a party, a fee or a matter, or comes from somebody who was never a client, that is a policy removal rather than a reply: see how to remove negative reviews from Google.

Where law firm reviews actually count

Google first, and it is not close. A Google Business Profile is what appears when somebody searches your firm's name, it feeds the map results for "family lawyer near me", and it is the only profile your former clients already have an account for. If you do one thing, do that one. The mechanics are in how to get more Google reviews.

Avvo carries client reviews alongside its own Avvo Rating and ranks well on lawyer-name searches in the US, so a neglected profile there is worth an hour of somebody's time. After those two it depends on your practice area and your city. Search the way a client would, from a phone, not signed in, and see which directories come back above your own website.

More for professional-services firms

• How to get more Google reviews, the long version of the ask.
• Review request email templates to adapt for a closing letter.
• Realtor review examples, the same problem with fewer constraints.
• Online reputation management for doctors, the closest parallel: another regulated profession where the reply is bound by confidentiality.
• Google reviews for mortgage brokers, where the advertising rules bite hardest of all.

Common questions

Where should I post a review of my lawyer?

The firm's Google Business Profile, under your own name, is the one that gets read. It appears when the next person searches the firm, and most of us already have the account. In the US, Avvo carries lawyer reviews too. Keep it to three or four sentences either way.

Can a lawyer ask a client for a Google review?

Yes. NYSBA Ethics Opinion 1286 (2025) holds that a lawyer may ask a former client to write a Google review, provided the lawyer does not draft it and does not condition any gift on what the review says. Conduct rules vary by jurisdiction, so check your own before you build a process on top of it.

Can a lawyer respond to a client's review?

Yes, within limits. Model Rule 1.6(a) still applies, and ABA Formal Opinion 496 found that a negative review does not trigger the self-defence exception. A reply may be professional and restrained. It may not reveal confidential information, and the safest replies do not confirm the person was a client at all.

Can a law firm get a bad review removed?

Only if it breaches the platform's policy, not because it is unfair. Google removes content that is off-topic, fake, or posted with a conflict of interest, and a review from somebody who was never a client of the firm often qualifies. A genuine opinion from a genuine client stays up, and your reply is the response to it.