ABA Model Rules
What do the ABA Model Rules let lawyers say in ads?
Rules 7.1 to 7.3 after the 2018 rewrite, the comments that decide most ad questions, three formal opinions, and how Florida, Texas, New York and others depart.
By Santiago Alvarez, Founder, Ad Hoc Digital
Last updated
The short answer
If you read one part of this page, read this.
The ABA Model Rules let a lawyer say almost anything true in an ad, through any medium, as long as it isn't false or misleading (Rule 7.1), names a responsible lawyer or firm with contact details (Rule 7.2(d)), and doesn't claim a certification the lawyer doesn't hold (Rule 7.2(c)). The limits that bite are on paying people to recommend you (7.2(b)) and on live person-to-person solicitation (7.3).
The catch is that the Model Rules aren't law anywhere. Each state adopts its own version, and states such as Florida, Texas, California and Nevada add filing, disclosures or results rules the ABA dropped. New York moved close to the ABA text on June 1, 2026.
Read this as the baseline, then check your state. This is a plain summary for marketing planning, not legal advice. Check the current rule with your bar or law society. We work with law firms across the US and Canada, and also in Australia and the UK.
What the Model Rules are
The Model Rules are a template that states copy, edit or ignore.
The ABA writes model rules; state supreme courts adopt the binding ones. On advertising, the ABA cut its own rules down sharply in 2018, and many states have followed only part of the way.
- The 2018 rewrite
On August 6, 2018, the ABA House of Delegates passed Resolution 101, amending Rules 7.1 to 7.5. Rules 7.4 and 7.5 now read "(Deleted)" in the ABA's table of contents. Specialization moved into Rule 7.2(c) and its comments, and firm names moved into the comments to Rule 7.1.
- What's left
Three rules carry nearly all of it: 7.1 (don't mislead), 7.2 (what you may pay for, specialist claims, who must be named) and 7.3 (solicitation). Rule 7.6, on political contributions, rarely touches marketing.
- Why it still matters if your state differs
State courts and bar committees borrow the ABA comments when their own rule is silent, and the comments are where the practical answers live: what makes a true result misleading, what counts as a recommendation, and why a Google search ad isn't solicitation.
Rule 7.1
Rule 7.1 bans false or misleading communications, including true statements that mislead.
The black letter is two sentences. The comment explains the three ways a true statement still breaks it: leaving out a needed fact, implying a conclusion with no factual basis, and creating unjustified expectations.
Rule 7.1 says a communication is false or misleading if it contains a material misrepresentation of fact or law, or omits a fact needed to keep the whole statement from misleading. Comment [1] makes clear it covers every communication about a lawyer's services, not only paid ads, so the website, social posts and a Business Profile description all count.
- Past results
Comment [3]: a truthful report of results may mislead if it leads a reasonable person to expect the same result "without reference to the specific factual and legal circumstances of each client's case." A seven-figure verdict in a headline is the classic example.
- Comparisons and claims you can't back up
The same comment says an unsubstantiated claim about your services or fees, or an unsubstantiated comparison with other lawyers, may mislead if it's specific enough that a reader would assume it can be proved. "Lower fees than any firm in Dallas" invites exactly that assumption.
- Disclaimers help, but don't cure everything
The comment says an appropriate disclaimer or qualifying language "may preclude" a finding that a statement misleads. May, not will. A results claim in a 30-character headline with the disclaimer three clicks away is the case it doesn't help.
- Calls to action that imply an obligation
Comment [2] also calls a true statement misleading if it makes a reasonable person believe they must take action when they don't. Ad copy styled as a notice ("Response required") falls here.
Rule 7.2
Rule 7.2 lets you pay for ads and leads, but not for a recommendation.
Rule 7.2(a) allows any media. Paragraph (b) bans giving anything of value for a recommendation, then lists five exceptions. Paragraphs (c) and (d) cover certified specialist claims and the name and contact line.
| Provision | What it says | What it means for marketing |
|---|---|---|
| 7.2(b)(1) and comment [3] | You may pay the reasonable costs of advertising, including online ads, directory listings and marketing vendors | Google, Meta, an agency and a web designer are all fine to pay |
| Comment [2] | A recommendation endorses or vouches for a lawyer's credentials, abilities, competence or character; a plain practice-area directory listing isn't one | Pay for placement, never for a third party's praise |
| Comment [5] | Paying a lead generator is allowed if it doesn't recommend you, its pay fits Rules 1.5(e) and 5.4, and its messages fit Rule 7.1 | It can't imply it vetted you, that the referral is free, or that it analyzed the person's problem |
| 7.2(b)(5) and comment [4] | Nominal thank-you gifts for a referral, not promised in advance | A holiday gift is fine; a standing reward per referral isn't |
| 7.2(c) and comments [9], [11] | "Certified" specialist only with an approved or ABA-accredited certifier, named in the ad; "specializes in" may be fine if true | Saying "specialist" isn't banned by the ABA text, but it is in some states |
| 7.2(d) and comment [12] | Every communication names at least one responsible lawyer or firm and gives contact information; a website address counts | In a search ad, the firm name plus the display URL may satisfy the ABA text; states differ |
Paying per lead is where most firms feel unsure. The ABA answer is yes, if the vendor doesn't vouch for you. New York's bar reached the same line in its own opinions, and our guide on paying for leads and referrals compares the states and provinces that wrote rules of their own.
Rule 7.3
Rule 7.3 bans live, person-to-person solicitation for money, and almost nothing else.
Solicitation means reaching out to a specific person you know needs help with a particular matter. The ABA bans it only when it's live, in person or by real-time call or video, and done for pecuniary gain.
- Not solicitation (comment [1]): billboards, internet banner ads, websites, TV ads, replies to a request for information, and anything "automatically generated in response to electronic searches". Google search ads and Local Services Ads sit on that side of the line.
- Not live contact (comment [2]): chat rooms, text messages and other written communications the person can easily ignore.
- Still banned: calling, video calling or visiting a stranger about their case, unless they're a lawyer, family, a close personal or prior professional contact, or someone who routinely buys that legal service for business (7.3(b)).
- Banned even when otherwise allowed (7.3(c)): contact after the person has said no, or contact involving coercion, duress or harassment.
Formal opinions
Three ABA formal opinions change how firms market, not just what ads say.
Formal opinions interpret the Model Rules. These three come up in our client work more than any others: who answers for a marketer's conduct, what a lawyer may post about cases, and how to answer a bad review.
| Opinion | Question | Answer that matters for marketing |
|---|---|---|
| 501 (April 13, 2022) | Is the lawyer responsible for solicitation by staff and vendors? | Yes, under Rules 5.3 and 8.4(a). Its examples include calling people from a sheriff's arrest list, and a lead generator whose staff contact people in mass tort chat rooms while the lawyer says "keep 'em coming" |
| 480 (March 6, 2018) | What can a lawyer blog or post about client matters? | No information relating to a representation, even if it's in a public record, unless a rule allows it; a "hypothetical" that identifies the client doesn't help |
| 496 (January 13, 2021) | Can a lawyer answer a negative online review with case details? | No. A bad review alone doesn't trigger the self-defense exception; you may ask the host to remove it, invite the person to talk privately, or say professional considerations prevent a reply |
Opinion 501 is the one firms underestimate. Hiring an agency or lead vendor doesn't move the responsibility. The opinion says supervising lawyers must train the people they retain on Rule 7.3, and that knowingly accepting the clients a vendor solicited makes the lawyer answerable for how they were found. Our guides on replying to negative reviews and social media rules apply 496 and 480 in detail.
Where states depart
Most states start from the ABA text, then add filing, disclosures or stricter results rules.
This table covers the US states with their own guide in our library, and the [advertising rules hub](/resources/lawyer-advertising-rules) adds Canada, Australia and the UK.
| State | Main departures from the ABA | Filing with the bar |
|---|---|---|
| Florida | Past results must be objectively verifiable; strict testimonial conditions; 30-day wait for injury-related written contact; name and office city in every ad | Yes, 20 days before first use; $250 per ad, $750 late (July 2026 forms) |
| Texas | Responsible lawyer's name and primary practice location in ads; "Board Certified" only through the Texas Board of Legal Specialization; contingent fee ads say who pays expenses | Yes, within 10 days after first use; $100 fee; website pages other than the homepage exempt |
| Nevada | Disclosures for contingency fees and past results in the ad itself | Yes, within 15 days of first use; $100 per ad; websites not filed |
| New York | Since June 1, 2026, ABA-style 7.1 and 7.3; the "Attorney Advertising" label and results disclaimer are gone; Rule 4.5 still limits defense-side contact after an injury | No |
| California | A statute adds limits: no promises of quick settlements, results presumed misleading out of context in electronic ads, name and office city required | No, but keep a copy of each ad for one year (B&P 6159.1) |
| Pennsylvania | Office city or county in every ad; "no fee" ads must mention expenses the client pays | No |
| Illinois | The court recognizes no specialist certifications; rules for lead platforms and directories since July 1, 2025 | No |
Details by state: Florida, Texas, New York, California, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Illinois.
A worked example
One hypothetical ad, read under the ABA text and three states.
This is an illustration, not a result and not a legal opinion. The ad is invented to show how the same words land differently.
The version we'd actually run in all four places drops the dollar figure from the ad and moves results to the landing page, next to the facts behind them. That's the pattern in our guide to what law firm ads can say.
How we use it
We treat the ABA text as the floor and the state rule as the ad's real limit.
When we write ads for a firm, the ABA rules tell us what is never fine anywhere. The firm's state rule tells us what has to be added, removed or filed.
Start from the state, not the ABA
We read the firm's state row in our rules table, re-checked against the regulator's own text when a client in that state launches. If a row can't be confirmed, the claim stays out of the ad.
Strip what fails everywhere
Superlatives, outcome promises, and claims nobody could prove fail Rule 7.1 in every state. Our ad check rejects them before a person reads the draft.
Hold the words that depend on the state
"Expert", "specialist", "certified", "no fee", ratings, awards and dollar amounts are flagged for a decision against that state's row, never written in by default.
Put the required name where Google always shows it
Where a state wants the lawyer or firm name (and sometimes the office city) in every ad, we pin a description carrying it to description position 1, one of the few spots Google says always shows.
Plan the filing before launch
For Florida, Texas and Nevada firms, the pre-launch review lists the filing deadline next to the ads. The lawyer approves every ad before it runs.
We see the same pattern across Google Ads and Meta ads: plain, specific copy clears every state's review and still gets the call. One DUI solo's Local Services Ads made $13,500 from $600 in ad spend with no results claims and no superlatives in sight.
Common mistakes
Where firms go wrong.
Mistakes we see when firms rely on the ABA text alone.
Treating the Model Rules as the rule
They bind no one directly. A Florida firm that follows only the ABA text will skip filing and run results claims Florida treats as misleading.
Assuming "specialist" is fine everywhere
The ABA comment allows it if true. Illinois, Ontario, BC and Alberta restrict it, and Texas limits certification claims to its own board.
Thinking an agency carries the risk
Opinion 501 says the lawyer answers for marketers' solicitation they knew about or failed to train against. Ask any vendor how its people contact prospects.
Paying a vendor that "vets" lawyers
Comment [5] to Rule 7.2 bars paying a lead generator that implies it recommends you or analyzed the person's problem. Read the vendor's own ads, not only the contract.
Telling case stories without consent
Opinion 480 covers public commentary, and public records don't make client details fair game. Teach the law; leave the client out.
Real results
What this looked like for real firms.
Results we can show without results claims in the ads: a US DUI solo on Local Services Ads and a Toronto solo on Google search ads.
Identifying details are anonymized to protect our clients. Individual result, not a promise or prediction of any specific outcome for your firm.
FAQ
Questions lawyers ask us.
Straight answers to the questions that come up most.
Are the ABA Model Rules binding on my firm?
No. They're a model. Your state supreme court adopts the binding rules, often close to the ABA text with local changes. Use the ABA version to understand the reasoning and your state's version to decide what to publish.
Can I say I'm a specialist under the ABA rules?
The ABA comment says a lawyer may generally say they specialize, based on experience or training, if it isn't misleading. Saying you're "certified" needs an approved or ABA-accredited certifier named in the ad. Several states and provinces are stricter, so check yours before it goes in an ad.
Can I put case results in an ad?
The ABA allows true results, but comment [3] to Rule 7.1 warns they can create unjustified expectations without context, and a disclaimer may help. Florida, California and Nevada add specific rules. In short search and social ads, we keep results on the landing page with the facts beside them.
Is a Google search ad a solicitation under Rule 7.3?
No. Comment [1] to Rule 7.3 says communications automatically generated in response to electronic searches aren't solicitation, and neither are websites or internet banner ads. A follow-up call to someone who submitted a form is a reply to a request for information.
Can I pay for leads under the ABA rules?
Yes, if the lead generator doesn't recommend you, its pay is consistent with the fee-sharing and independence rules, and its own ads aren't misleading. Our guide to paying for leads covers the state versions.
Do I need a disclaimer like "Attorney Advertising"?
Not under the ABA rules, which require only the name and contact information of a responsible lawyer or firm. New York dropped its label on June 1, 2026. Some states still require labels on targeted mail, so check yours.
Can you check our ads against our state's rules?
We check every ad we write for a client against that state's rules before the lawyer approves it, and the final call stays with the lawyer. If you want that for your Local Services Ads or search campaigns, schedule a consultation.
Where we do this
The services this guide touches.
What this looks like when we run it for a firm, with a demo for your practice on each page.
Sources
Where these facts come from.
Official pages we read when writing this page. Platforms and rules change, so check the current version before you act on any of it. This is marketing guidance, not legal advice.
- American Bar Association, Model Rule 7.1: Communications Concerning a Lawyer's Services
- American Bar Association, Comment on Model Rule 7.1
- American Bar Association, Model Rule 7.2: Communications Concerning a Lawyer's Services: Specific Rules
- American Bar Association, Comment on Model Rule 7.2
- American Bar Association, Model Rule 7.3: Solicitation of Clients
- American Bar Association, Comment on Model Rule 7.3
- American Bar Association, Model Rules of Professional Conduct: Table of Contents
- American Bar Association, Amendments to Model Rules 7.1 to 7.5
- American Bar Association, Formal Opinion 501: Solicitation
- American Bar Association, Formal Opinion 480: Confidentiality Obligations for Lawyer Blogging
- American Bar Association, Formal Opinion 496: Responding to Online Criticism
- The Florida Bar, Handbook on Lawyer Advertising (December 2025)
- The Florida Bar, Cover sheet for still images (July 2026)
- Texas Center for Legal Ethics, Rule 7.04 Filing Requirements for Advertisements and Solicitation Communications
- State Bar of Texas, Advertising Review
- State Bar of Nevada, Lawyer Advertising
- New York State Bar Association, The Amendments to the Advertising Rules
- California Legislative Information, Business and Professions Code, Article 9.5
- Pennsylvania Code, 204 Pa. Code Rule 7.2
- Illinois Courts, Rule 7.4: Communication of Fields of Practice and Specialization
Written by
Founder of Ad Hoc Digital. Leads strategy and works directly with every client firm on AI search, Local Services Ads, Google Ads and Meta ads.
More about SantiagoWant a second pair of eyes on this?
Book a free 30-minute call. Tell us how cases come in today, and we'll tell you straight what we'd change, and whether we can help.