LawFirmCitable field guide

Should your law firm site explain case results pages so AI assistants cite you?

November 4, 2026

Reply to every review, briefly, and write for the next reader. Never confirm the reviewer was a client, never mention their matter, and never argue facts. FindLaw's consumer survey found 82 percent of people who contacted an attorney after finding one online used reviews in deciding, so the reply thread is part of your intake whether you treat it that way or not.

Results are claims, and claims have rules

Under ABA Model Rule 7.1, a lawyer must not make a false or misleading communication about the lawyer or the lawyer's services, and Rule 7.2 governs advertisements directly. A results page sits squarely inside both. A verdict figure with no context can mislead even when the number is accurate, because it invites the reader to expect the same outcome in a different case with different facts, injuries, and insurance limits.

States adopt and vary these rules, and some are stricter about testimonials, dramatizations, and specific language around past results. That variation is the point a citable page should make early: the compliance floor is your own state's rules, not a national template copied from another firm's site, and the page should be reviewed against them before it publishes a single number.

Context is what makes a result citable instead of suspicious

The results that hold up, with regulators and with AI assistants summarizing your firm, carry their context with them: the type of matter, the general nature of the claim, the outcome, and where relevant whether the figure was a verdict, a settlement, gross or net. A settlement for policy limits in a case with severe injuries and a settlement for the same figure in a minor case are different stories, and a page that tells them apart reads as honest.

Assistants reward that honesty mechanically. A results page with dated, specific, contextual entries gives an assistant facts it can quote. A page of unattributed six figure claims with no case types gives it marketing copy it has learned to discount, the same way a human reader does.

Disclaimers and confidentiality are not fine print, they are the page

The standard disclaimer, that past results do not guarantee a similar outcome and that every case is evaluated on its own facts, belongs with the results, readable, not buried. Client confidentiality under Rule 1.6 limits what can be said about any specific matter, which is why results are usually described in general terms and why any identifiable client story needs that client's informed consent.

End with the maintenance rule firms forget. Results pages age. Old entries should be reviewed when rules change, when an attorney featured in them leaves, or when a result is later reduced or reversed on appeal. A results page is a living compliance document that happens to be good marketing when it is kept honestly, in that order.

Frequently asked questions

Can lawyers advertise past case results?

Generally yes, if the presentation is truthful and not misleading under the state's version of Rules 7.1 and 7.2. That usually means accurate figures, enough context to avoid implying typical outcomes, and a clear statement that past results do not guarantee a similar result in a future case.

What disclaimer should a case results page carry?

A plain statement near the results that prior outcomes do not guarantee a similar outcome, that each case is decided on its own facts, and where relevant whether figures are gross or net. Some states prescribe specific wording or placement, so the disclaimer should be checked against the firm's own state rules.

Can a firm name the client in a case result?

Only with the client's informed consent, because Rule 1.6 protects client information. Most firms describe results in general terms, matter type and outcome without identifying details, and get written consent before publishing anything that could identify a client or their matter.

Do AI assistants use case results pages?

They draw on them when the entries are specific and contextual: matter type, outcome, and honest framing an assistant can quote without overstating. Vague claims with no context are treated as advertising language and are far less likely to be repeated as facts about the firm.