What AI assistants say when someone asks for a lawyer

Abels & Annes is an established Chicago personal injury firm, and it was named on two of the twenty-two questions that never mention it. The firms named instead are the largest in the city: Salvi Law's own site was cited on twenty of the thirty questions, Malman Law on fifteen, Clifford Law on fourteen, Smith LaCien on twelve. Every 'best personal injury lawyer in Chicago' variant — for accident victims, for families, for car accident claims — went to Super Lawyers profiles and to those firms' homepages. Reputation carries in legal, but only at the top of the market; below it the answer is assembled from directories. The report's list is two items long: answer the 'best for accident victims' question on the homepage, which describes cases and never says who the firm is for, and claim the Justia, Martindale and BBB listings that are already being cited without it.

On each profile you claim, write the name, address, phone and website exactly as the site has them.

• Justia

  Claim it

  Cited on 14 of the 30 questions in the run above.

  1. Claim the firm's and each attorney's Justia profile.
  2. Fill in practice areas, jurisdictions and office locations.
  Claim it on Justia

• Super Lawyers

  Chosen, not claimed

  Cited by ChatGPT and Perplexity for “best personal injury lawyer for accident victims in Chicago, IL”.

  Lawyers are chosen through nominations, research and peer review; there is no application that buys a place. A lawyer who is selected keeps the profile current.

• Best Lawyers

  Chosen, not claimed

  Cited on 11 of the 30 questions in the run above.

  Chosen by peer review — lawyers voting on lawyers. Nothing to claim; the firm's own pages are what an engine can quote beside it.

Is publishing legal content this way an ethics problem?

Bar rules on advertising and on anything that reads as a guarantee vary by state, and they apply to this exactly as they apply to any other marketing. Today the question is simpler than it sounds: nothing reaches the site without your firm. We write pages and your firm reads, edits or approves each one; an approved new page goes into WordPress or Webflow with one click to take it back down, and anything else is copied in by whoever runs the site.

We already get mentioned by ChatGPT. Is there anything to do?

Look at what it cites. Being described in the prose while every link goes to a directory means your visibility depends on those directories continuing to rank you. The work is turning mentions into citations of your own pages.

Do you write legal content for us?

Yes, as articles for review: the report's tasks name the pages that are missing, we write them from what your site and your notes already say — never from facts we would have to invent — and each one waits for your approval. A law firm should never publish generated copy unreviewed.

What if our practice areas are very specific?

That helps. Narrow questions have fewer competing answers, and a firm that genuinely answers a narrow question in writing is easy to quote.

Does this replace our SEO agency?

No. If you have an agency, this is a report they can act on — and if you are an agency, it is the work you do for your client, sent under your own name and logo on the Agency plans.

What does the first report include?

10 prompts on three engines, who was recommended instead on each, and the tasks for what the site does not answer. It is free: a free account gets 10 credits — one report, 10 prompts on three engines — with no card.