What ABA Formal Opinion 496 says
A bad review is not a reason to reveal client information. The ABA's ethics committee issued Formal Opinion 496 on January 13, 2021, and its summary settles the main question:
"A negative online review, alone, does not meet the requirements of permissible disclosure in self-defense under Model Rule 1.6(b)(5)." (ABA Formal Opinion 496)
"Lawyers who choose to respond online must not disclose information that relates to a client matter, or that could reasonably lead to the discovery of confidential information by another, in the response." (ABA Formal Opinion 496)
"Information" here is broad. It includes facts in the public record, and anything that lets a reader work out what happened in the case (Opinion 496). An ABA opinion is guidance on the Model Rules. Your state's rules and opinions control.
Can I respond to a bad review at all?
Yes, within limits. Opinion 496 lists what is allowed (ABA Formal Opinion 496):
| Option | Allowed? | What the opinion says |
|---|---|---|
| Don't respond | Yes, and suggested | Replies draw attention and more posts; silence may let it sink in search results |
| Ask Google or Avvo to remove it | Yes | You may say the post is inaccurate or that you never represented the poster, with no client details |
| Invite them offline | Yes | Its example: "Please contact me by telephone so that we can discuss your concerns." |
| Say you can't respond | Yes | Its sample: "Professional obligations do not allow me to respond as I would wish." |
| Say the poster is not a client | Yes, with care | Only if true and the post isn't about a real matter (see below) |
| Correct the facts with case details | No | Disclosure is not justified by a review |
The opinion warns that an offer to talk only works if you actually try to fix the problem. If the critic is a client or former client, you may answer them directly and privately, but not online.
What if the reviewer was never my client?
You owe a stranger no confidentiality, so you may simply say they are not a client. But if the post is from an opposing party, opposing counsel, or a client's relative and it describes a real case, the client's confidentiality still applies. Opinion 496 puts it this way:
"Even a general disclaimer that the events are not accurately portrayed may reveal that the lawyer was involved in the events mentioned, which could disclose confidential client information." (ABA Formal Opinion 496)
You can ask the client for informed consent to respond. The opinion suggests agreeing the wording with them first.
Do state bars say the same thing?
Mostly yes, with differences in how much you may say.
| Jurisdiction | Rule of thumb |
|---|---|
| New York, Opinion 1032 (2014) | "A lawyer may not disclose client confidential information solely to respond to a former client's criticism" posted on a review site (NYSBA) |
| Texas, Opinion 662 (2016) | "The lawyer may post a proportional and restrained response" that reveals no confidential information (Texas Ethics Committee) |
| District of Columbia, Opinion 370 (2016) | "Attorneys may, with caution, respond to comments or online reviews from clients." D.C. Rule 1.6(e)(3) allows disclosure "to the extent reasonably necessary to respond to specific allegations by the client" (D.C. Bar) |
D.C. is the outlier because its confidentiality rule has different words. Check your own state's Rule 1.6 and opinions before you post.
What happens to lawyers who get it wrong?
Opinion 496 lists discipline cases. Among them: a Colorado lawyer suspended six months in 2016 for revealing former clients' criminal charges and a bounced check in replies to reviews, and an Illinois lawyer publicly reprimanded in 2014 for disclosing a client's conduct while answering an Avvo review (ABA Formal Opinion 496, note 7).
How do I get a fake review removed from Google?
Flag it from your Business Profile: go to your profile, select Read reviews, select Report next to the review, choose the reason, then Send report. You can track it in Google's Reviews Management Tool (Google Business Profile Help). Google's own rule:
"Do not report a review just because you disagree with it or dislike it." (Google Business Profile Help)
You can report any review, but Google removes only those that break its content policies (its examples: spam, profanity). Keep the report free of client details, as Opinion 496 requires for any removal request.
Is it different for Ontario lawyers?
In Ontario the duty is rule 3.3-1: a lawyer "shall hold in strict confidence all information concerning the business and affairs of the client" (LSO Rules, Chapter 3). Rule 3.3-4 allows disclosure only when it is alleged that the lawyer committed a crime, is civilly liable, was negligent, or engaged in professional misconduct, and then the lawyer "shall not disclose more information than is required." The rule does not mention online reviews.
Example
Client posts a one-star Google review about a lost case
The lawyer does not reply for a week, then posts: "Professional obligations do not allow me to respond as I would wish." No case facts, no outcome, no criticism of the client.
Stranger posts a fake review
The poster never consulted the firm. The lawyer reports it to Google for removal and may reply that the reviewer is not a client.
Opposing party attacks the lawyer
The review describes a real divorce. Because it relates to a client's matter, the lawyer says nothing about the case and either ignores it or asks the client for consent to a short, agreed reply.
Different for you?
- You want more good reviews to bury the bad one: see asking for reviews: the FTC rule and text consent.
- Your firm's Google listing is the problem, not one review: see Google Business Profile for lawyers.
- You want to quote reviews on your website: see law firm website advertising rules.
- A competitor's fake listing is stealing calls: see reporting fake Google listings.
- You want reviews and listings handled every week: see the SEO & GEO agent.