A law firm's response to criticism must begin with confidentiality, not the urge to rebut. Preserve the review and assess whether any public response is appropriate. A client mentioning a matter online does not automatically authorize the firm to disclose its records or version of events.
01
Review the duty before the draft
Identify the relevant jurisdiction and professional rules. ABA guidance on online criticism explains why a negative review does not generally create permission to disclose client information under its model-rule framework. State requirements can differ. For cross-border practices, do not assume a US ethics opinion supplies the entire rule for Mexican matters.
02
Choose among silence, reporting and limited response
Assess whether a policy-based platform report has supporting evidence. A neutral contact invitation may be appropriate, but even confirming representation can raise concerns. Keep case-specific explanations in an authorized private process. Have a responsible lawyer review the response rather than asking a marketing vendor to improvise from the client file.
- Preserve the review URL and exact wording.
- Separate factual investigation from the public communications record.
- Avoid client names, case details and outcome descriptions in replies.
- Document the reason for responding or choosing not to respond.
03
Handle a realistic scenario
A reviewer alleges that the firm ignored them. Before posting email dates or billing records, review confidentiality and the engagement history privately. The public objective is a professional process, not winning an argument through disclosure. If the review is genuinely unrelated to the firm, assess evidence and the platform's rules without inventing a client relationship.
Frequently asked questions
Does an unfair review permit a detailed defense?
Not automatically. Confidentiality and local professional obligations still apply. Seek jurisdiction-specific ethics advice for a disputed or sensitive response.
Should the firm always say the reviewer was never a client?
No. First verify the facts and consider whether the statement itself reveals protected information or creates a misleading impression. A blanket response template is unsuitable.
Continue with your next step
Related guides on this topic
Sources and policies
Check the current policy before submitting a request.
You do not have to figure out the next step alone.
Share the URLs and explain your concern. We will review the context and explain which options are worth assessing.
Request a confidential reviewOr call (307) 429-2531Educational information, not legal advice. Outcomes depend on the facts and decisions made by third parties.