Google Reviews for Lawyers: The Compliant Way

Many guides on Google reviews for lawyers tell you to ask your happy clients. Google’s policy forbids that filter: merchants may not “selectively solicit positive reviews from customers.” The safe system is simpler. Send every client the same request when the matter closes, offer nothing for it, and reply to criticism without confirming anything about the case.

This guide quotes the rules that top-ranking guides only summarize or skip: Google’s review policy, the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) 2024 fake review rule and bar confidentiality rules. It adds a request template and reply wording from ethics opinions. It’s marketing guidance, not legal advice.

Key Takeaways

• Google bans review incentives, and merchants may not “selectively solicit positive reviews from customers” (Google).
• The FTC’s fake review rule (16 CFR Part 465) took effect October 21, 2024, with civil penalties for knowing violations (FTC).
• ABA Formal Opinion 496 (2021): a negative review alone doesn’t justify revealing client information.
• Google reviews are public and can’t be anonymous (Google), which matters for criminal defense and family clients.
• More reviews and positive ratings “can help your business’s local ranking” (Google) and affect Local Services Ads ranking (Google).

Three rulebooks apply to every review request

Three sets of rules apply to a firm’s review requests. Google’s policy decides whether reviews stay up, the FTC’s rule is federal law, and your state’s version of the ABA Model Rules governs your license.

Google’s review policy bans incentives, gating and insider reviews

Google’s Maps content policy says a review “should reflect an actual experience with a business, and be genuine and unbiased” (Google). Under its rating manipulation rules, merchants may not:

• Offer incentives “such as payment, discounts, free goods and/or services” for “posting any review or revision or removal of a negative review.”
• “Discourage or prohibit negative reviews, or selectively solicit positive reviews from customers.” The second half is review gating.

Merchants also may not pressure people to review “while on the premises” or “request that specific content be included.” The policy names staff review quotas, requests for content “that identifies a staff member,” and reviews from people with a conflict of interest, such as “current or former employment” or “familial relationships.”

One guide on page one for this search (October 2026) tells firms to ask staff, family and friends for reviews, and to have associates or family post “in their place” for clients who want privacy. Google forbids both.

For fake or incentivized reviews, Google can also restrict the profile for a set period: no new reviews, existing ones unpublished, or a warning “to let consumers know that fake reviews were removed” (Google).

In plain terms: ask everyone or no one, pay no one, and keep staff and family off your profile.

The FTC’s fake review rule has applied since October 2024

The FTC’s Rule on the Use of Consumer Reviews and Testimonials, 16 CFR Part 465, “went into effect on October 21, 2024,” and “authorizes courts to impose civil penalties for knowing violations” (FTC). It covers any business “that sells products or services” (by our reading, law firms included) and online reviews on any site “dedicated in whole or in part to receiving and displaying such evaluations,” such as Avvo or Yelp.

The sections that matter for a firm:

• Section 465.2: no writing, creating or selling fake or false reviews. Reviews from “generalized solicitations to purchasers” are carved out of the buying and insider parts.
• Section 465.4: no incentives tied to a review “expressing a particular sentiment, whether positive or negative.”
• Section 465.5: officers and managers who review the business must disclose the relationship, and should tell staff or relatives they ask for reviews to disclose theirs.
• Section 465.7(a): no “unfounded or groundless legal threat,” intimidation or knowingly false public accusation to stop or remove a review.

The rule doesn’t name review gating. Asked whether a business can “ask for reviews only from customers” it thinks are happy, the FTC’s Q&A says the rule has no specific ban but adds that “this practice could violate the FTC Act.” Example 11 of the Endorsement Guides, 16 CFR 255.2 says inviting only buyers who gave “very positive feedback” to post reviews “may be an unfair or deceptive practice.”

Check your fee agreement too. The Consumer Review Fairness Act makes it illegal for a company to use a standard contract provision that “bars or restricts” a customer’s ability to review it. The FTC says to remove such provisions from form contracts, so start with your engagement letter.

Bar rules add confidentiality and testimonial limits

Bar rules add a duty most businesses don’t carry: nearly everything about a client’s matter stays confidential, even after it ends. These are the ABA baseline; check your state’s version.

• Confidentiality, Rule 1.6(a): “A lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent,” unless disclosure is impliedly authorized or a listed exception applies (ABA).
• Former clients, Rule 1.9(c)(2): the same limit continues after the matter ends (ABA). Ask after the close, and every reviewer is a former client.
• Paying for recommendations, Rule 7.2(b): a lawyer may not “give or promise anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer’s services,” except “nominal gifts as an expression of appreciation that are neither intended nor reasonably expected to be a form of compensation” (ABA). Google’s incentive ban has no such exception.
• Misleading communications, Rule 7.1: “A lawyer shall not make a false or misleading communication about the lawyer or the lawyer’s services” (ABA).
• Your vendors, Rule 5.3: lawyers must make “reasonable efforts” to ensure a nonlawyer’s conduct “is compatible with the professional obligations of the lawyer” (ABA). Our take: an agency that buys reviews for you is your problem.

States can be stricter. Florida’s Rule 4-7.13(b)(9) lists, among deceptive or inherently misleading ads, those with a testimonial that:

• “does not represent what clients of that lawyer or law firm generally experience”;
• “has been written or drafted by the lawyer,” or was given for “something of value”; or
• lacks the disclaimer “that the prospective client may not obtain the same or similar results.”

Florida treats websites as advertising, so this applies the moment a Google review goes on your site.

Criminal defense and family clients need extra privacy

Criminal defense and family clients give up privacy when they post a Google review, because it tells the world they hired your firm. Google’s help page says “All reviews are public and anyone can find what you add. You’re unable to add an anonymous review,” and others see “the name on your About me page” (Google).

For a defense client, that review names them as someone who needed a defense lawyer. For a family law client, it can announce a divorce. A client who describes the night of the arrest has posted it under their own name.

Our take for these practices:

1. Ask after the matter is closed, not while charges or a custody case are pending.
2. Keep the request generic. No charge or case number; family or an employer may see the phone.
3. Say the review is public and let them decide what to share.
4. Ask the client, not the parent or spouse who paid. The payer’s review can expose a case the client never agreed to share.
5. Don’t confirm the case in a reply. The client chose to disclose; your reply would be the firm’s disclosure.

If a review over-shares, our advice is to call the client privately and ask whether they’d like to edit it; reviewers can change a review after it posts (Google). Offer nothing for the edit.

Ask once, at the close, with the same message to every client

The compliant request goes to every client at the same point, with the same wording, by a channel they agreed to. Google suggests you “ask customers to visit a Google link or scan a QR code” (Google).

To get the link, open your Business Profile, select Read Reviews, then Get more reviews, and copy the link or save the QR code, which Google makes only “on a computer browser” (Google). Google suggests using it “in thank you emails”; for a firm, that’s the closing letter. Local Services Ads accounts show the same link under “Business Verifications” then the “Google Business Profile” tab (Google).

Our take: let the matter closing trigger the request in your CRM, so no one on staff decides who gets asked (pipelines and automations are in our lead management guide). Send one request and one reminder. Skip a client only for a reason unrelated to the outcome, such as a request not to be contacted.

Some guides say to ask the moment a client thanks you; that trigger picks only happy clients. Keep the pace steady too: Google counts “unusual volumes or patterns of review contributions” that suggest manipulation as rating manipulation (Google).

What should a review request text say?

We wrote this template. Swap in your details and send it to every client whose matter closed:

Hi [first name], it’s [your name] at [firm name]. Thank you for working with us. If you’re willing, we’d appreciate an honest Google review of your experience with our office: [review link]. Google reviews are public and show your Google profile name, so share only what you’re comfortable sharing.

“Honest” and “your experience” invite any rating, and the FTC’s Example 11 says a request to all recent buyers is fine “even if it had expressed its hope for positive reviews.” The last sentence protects the client without telling them what to write. For a closing letter or email, use the same words plus the QR code.

Which lines should come out of a request?

Want a second look at your review process, and at which marketing turns into signed cases? That’s what a Law Firm Growth Evaluation is for.

Reply to negative reviews without confirming the case

ABA Formal Opinion 496 advises that “lawyers should consider not responding to a negative post or review,” because a reply can draw more attention to it. A negative review alone doesn’t trigger the self-defense exception in Rule 1.6(b)(5) (ABA Formal Opinion 496). Instead, a lawyer may:

• Ask the site to remove the post, saying only that it “is not accurate or that the lawyer has not represented the poster if that is the case.”
• Offer a private talk: “Please contact me by telephone so that we can discuss your concerns.”
• Decline: “Professional obligations do not allow me to respond as I would wish.”

What do state ethics opinions allow?

State opinions issued before Opinion 496 reach the same answer, and two offer wording:

Texas’s point matters most to defense firms: an arrest may be public record, and you still can’t use it in a reply.

Two replies we wrote from those opinions:

• A critical review that may be from a client: “Our professional obligations don’t allow us to respond to reviews in detail. If you’d like to talk, please call our office at [number].”
• A review from someone you never represented: report it to Google as content “not based on a real experience,” and if you reply, say only that you haven’t represented the person. Opinion 496 warns that a post by an opposing party or a client’s relative can still relate to a real matter, so check first.

Don’t report reviews you merely dislike; Google “doesn’t get involved in conflict between businesses and customers” (Google). And by our reading, threatening to sue over a truthful review can run into Section 465.7(a).

The cases Opinion 496 cites show the cost: a Colorado lawyer suspended six months after replies that “revealed criminal charges made against clients,” another suspended eighteen months for posting “confidential and sensitive information,” and an Indiana lawyer disbarred who, among other violations, was “monetarily incentivizing positive reviews.”

How should a law firm reply to positive reviews?

Briefly, and without confirming anything. Google’s tips for negative reviews say to “address the reviewer by name and acknowledge their specific feedback” (Google), advice written for every business and risky in any law firm reply. Our reading of Rule 1.6: “Thank you for taking the time to leave a review” is safe; “Glad we could help with your DUI” confirms a matter.

Reviews feed your Business Profile and Local Services Ads rankings

Reviews affect where you show in local search results and Local Services Ads. They “show next to your Business Profile in Maps and Search” (Google). Google’s ranking page says prominence is “also based on info like how many websites link to your business and how many reviews you have,” and “more reviews and positive ratings can help your business’s local ranking” (Google).

A few critical reviews aren’t a disaster: Google says “a mix of positive and negative feedback often feels more trustworthy” (Google).

Local Services Ads (LSA) lean on reviews more directly: “star ratings and number of reviews affect how your business is ranked within Local Services Ads” (Google). Profile quality counts “your rating, number of reviews,” and better profiles “may rank higher and may also pay lower costs per lead” (Google).

None of these pages gives a target review count or says replying to every review raises your rank. Our take: compare your review volume and rating with the map pack firms for your main searches, and keep requests steady. More on local SEO for law firms, Local Services Ads for attorneys, criminal defense SEO and competitors who game their Google profiles.

Frequently asked questions about Google reviews for lawyers

Is review software with a “rate us first” screen allowed?

Not if low scores go to a private form and only high scores reach Google. That’s the gating the FTC describes in Example 11. Software is fine when every client gets the same Google link.

Can we post our Google reviews on our website?

Yes, with care. Florida defines a testimonial as a statement about “the quality of the lawyer’s services,” so a reposted review needs the “same or similar results” disclaimer there. The FTC warns that “non-representative consumer reviews in marketing could be deceptive” (FTC). Show a fair sample, not only the best lines.

What should a client write in a review of a lawyer?

Their own experience, in their own words. Florida’s rule comment says clients are “well-qualified to opine on matters such as courtesy, promptness, efficiency, and professional demeanor” (The Florida Bar). Nothing about the charge or the outcome is needed.

Same request, every client, nothing confirmed in public

Send the same request to every client and confirm nothing in public. That takes three habits: the matter closing triggers one request, every client gets the same words with nothing attached, and criticism gets Opinion 496’s wording instead of the facts of the case. Your online reputation then reflects every client, which is what all three rulebooks ask for.

Sources

1. Google Maps User Generated Content Policy Help, “Prohibited & restricted content,” https://support.google.com/contributionpolicy/answer/7400114?hl=en, checked 2026-10-21.
2. Federal Trade Commission, “Consumer Reviews and Testimonials Rule: Questions and Answers,” https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/consumer-reviews-testimonials-rule-questions-answers, checked 2026-10-21.
3. Google Business Profile Help, “Business Profile restrictions for policy violations,” https://support.google.com/business/answer/14114287?hl=en, checked 2026-10-21.
4. eCFR, “16 CFR Part 465: Rule on the Use of Consumer Reviews and Testimonials,” https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-465, checked 2026-10-21.
5. eCFR, “16 CFR 255.2: Consumer endorsements,” https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-16/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-255/section-255.2, checked 2026-10-21.
6. Federal Trade Commission, “Consumer Review Fairness Act: What Businesses Need to Know,” https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/consumer-review-fairness-act-what-businesses-need-know, checked 2026-10-21.
7. American Bar Association, “Rule 1.6: Confidentiality of Information,” https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_1_6_confidentiality_of_information/, checked 2026-10-21.
8. American Bar Association, “Rule 1.9: Duties to Former Clients,” https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_1_9_duties_of_former_clients/, checked 2026-10-21.
9. American Bar Association, “Rule 7.2: Communications Concerning a Lawyer’s Services: Specific Rules,” https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_7_2_advertising/, checked 2026-10-21.
10. American Bar Association, “Rule 7.1: Communication Concerning a Lawyer’s Services,” https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_7_1_communication_concerning_a_lawyer_s_services/, checked 2026-10-21.
11. American Bar Association, “Comment on Rule 7.1,” https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_7_1_communication_concerning_a_lawyer_s_services/comment_on_rule_7_1/, checked 2026-10-21.
12. American Bar Association, “Rule 5.3: Responsibilities Regarding Nonlawyer Assistance,” https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_5_3_responsibilities_regarding_nonlawyer_assistant/, checked 2026-10-21.
13. The Florida Bar, “Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, Chapter 4” (October 1, 2026), https://www-media.floridabar.org/uploads/2026/10/2027_04-OCT-Chapter-4-RRTFB.pdf, checked 2026-10-21.
14. Google Maps Help, “Add, edit, or delete Google Maps reviews & ratings,” https://support.google.com/maps/answer/6230175?hl=en, checked 2026-10-21.
15. ABA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility, “Formal Opinion 496: Responding to Online Criticism” (January 13, 2021), copy hosted by the Colorado Bar Association, https://www.cobar.org/Portals/COBAR/Repository/CBA/Ethics22221/aba-formal-opinion-496.pdf, checked 2026-10-21.
16. Google Business Profile Help, “Tips to get more reviews,” https://support.google.com/business/answer/3474122?hl=en, checked 2026-10-21.
17. Google Business Profile Help, “Create a Google link or QR code to request reviews,” https://support.google.com/business/answer/16816815?hl=en, checked 2026-10-21.
18. Google Local Services Help, “Reviews and Ratings on Local Services Ads,” https://support.google.com/localservices/answer/7496631?hl=en, checked 2026-10-21.
19. Texas Center for Legal Ethics, “Opinion 662” (August 2016), https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-662/, checked 2026-10-21.
20. New York State Bar Association, “Ethics Opinion 1032” (October 30, 2014), https://nysba.org/ethics-opinion-1032/, checked 2026-10-21.
21. The Florida Bar, “Florida Bar Ethics Opinion 20-01” (October 9, 2020), https://www-media.floridabar.org/uploads/2020/11/FL-Bar-Ethics-Op-20-1.pdf, checked 2026-10-21.
22. Google Business Profile Help, “Report inappropriate reviews on your Business Profile,” https://support.google.com/business/answer/4596773?hl=en, checked 2026-10-21.
23. Google Business Profile Help, “Tips to improve your local ranking on Google,” https://support.google.com/business/answer/7091?hl=en, checked 2026-10-21.
24. Google Local Services Help, “About ad rankings,” https://support.google.com/localservices/answer/7527305?hl=en, checked 2026-10-21.

Header image: AI-generated image.