When it comes to mitigating the reputational damage caused by a client’s negative online review, attorneys can neither disclose confidential client information when responding nor inappropriately solicit positive reviews.
While attorneys are allowed to respond to a client’s negative online review, there are certain “do’s” and “don’ts” to keep in mind. For example, Michael Kennedy, who serves as Vermont’s bar counsel, recommends to “think, and breathe deep before responding.” He also highlights that “there’s no ethical risk in not responding.” Furthermore, Thomas Wilkinson Jr., a member of the ABA Standing Committee on Professionalism, suggests the following sample response to a negative review: “Lawyer confidentiality obligations prevent us from correcting the factual background in this post. We are very proud of our track record of client satisfaction and favorable results.”
In terms of “don’ts” ABA Rule 1.6 prohibits divulging confidential information acquired during the professional relationship with a client, unless an exception, like self-defense, applies. However, according to the North Carolina State Bar’ January 23 proposed opinion, self-defense is not viable when it comes to aggressive responses to negative reviews. Specifically, the proposed opinion says that “the ‘self-defense’ exception applies to legal claims and disciplinary charges arising in civil, criminal, disciplinary or other proceedings,” and concludes that a negative online review does not rise to this threshold.
Moreover, “astroturfing” or disseminating positive fake online reviews in exchange for compensation, is a practice in direct violation of ABA Rule 7.2(b). This rule states that “a lawyer shall not compensate, give or promise anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer’s services.” Attorneys’ “astroturfing” could also implicate the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR S 255.1(C), which states that if a reviewer is not “a bona fide user of [the product or service] at the time the endorsement was given,” the review is deemed deceptive.
Read the full article here.
Reviews Reviews
