--- title: "The State of Law Firm Websites 2026" description: "Selling websites to small law firms and solo practitioners? We scanned 125 of their sites: only 39% pair a tappable phone number with office hours, 24/7 availability or a response time. Median score 76/100. The fixable problems to pitch, Q4 2026." edition: "Q4 2026" date_published: 2026-10-12 date_modified: 2026-10-13 author: Clikiti canonical_url: https://clikiti.com/research/law/2026-q4 pdf: https://clikiti.com/research/law/2026-q4/report.pdf data: https://clikiti.com/research/law/2026-q4/data.json data_csv: https://clikiti.com/research/law/2026-q4/data.csv license: "CC BY 4.0" license_url: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ attribution: "Clikiti, The State of Law Firm Websites 2026 (Q4 2026), https://clikiti.com/research/law/2026-q4" audience: "Web agencies and freelancers selling to small law firms and solo practitioners" sample_size: 125 margin_of_error: "up to ±8.8 percentage points (95% confidence)" data_source: automated scans of real websites --- # The State of Law Firm Websites 2026 (Q4 2026) **Answer:** Only 39% of the 125 small law firm websites we scanned pair a tappable phone number with office hours, 24/7 availability or a response time. *Free to use and cite under CC BY 4.0. Credit Clikiti with a link.* For small agencies and freelancers who sell websites to small law firms and solo practitioners. We scanned 125 of their websites: 0% score under 60 out of 100, and 76% leave at least three of the questions clients ask unanswered. Here is where the winnable work is, which problems to lead a pitch with, and how to show them without days of spec design. Clikiti scanned 125 small law firm websites in October 2026 and checked each one against 12 checks: 8 questions clients ask before choosing, plus accessibility and speed checks tied to WCAG 2.2 and Core Web Vitals. ## Key findings - Only 39% of the 125 small law firm websites we scanned pair a tappable phone number with office hours, 24/7 availability or a response time. - A typical site answers four of the eight questions clients ask before choosing (mean 4.3). - The median overall score is 76 out of 100 (mean 77). - The least-answered questions are "Can I reach someone now?" (39%), "Are they licensed here?" (43%) and "Do clients vouch for them?" (45%). - The best-answered are "Do they handle my kind of case?" (91%) and "Who will handle my case?" (63%). - Small business and employment have the highest median score (79), against 77 for personal injury, 77 for criminal defence and immigration and 75 for family and estate. - 86% fail "Text contrast passes 4.5:1" (WCAG 1.4.3). - 68% fail "Loads in under 2.5 s on a phone" (Core Web Vitals · LCP). - 42% fail "LegalService or Attorney structured data" (Schema.org · LegalService). - Personal injury firms state a consultation cost more often than business firms. - Practice groups differ in median score by at least 3 points. ## The questions clients ask Share of the 125 sites that answer each question on the home page or a page it links to, least answered first. | Question | What we checked | Sites that answer | |---|---|---:| | Can I reach someone now? | Tappable phone plus hours or response time | 39% | | Are they licensed here? | Bar admission or licence stated | 43% | | Do clients vouch for them? | Reviews marked up or shown in a widget | 45% | | Have they won cases like mine? | Case results or client testimonials shown | 46% | | Can I ask without calling? | Message form with five fields or fewer | 50% | | What does it cost to talk? | Consultation cost stated | 54% | | Who will handle my case? | Lawyers named, each with a profile | 63% | | Do they handle my kind of case? | Each practice area on its own page | 91% | ## By type of site | Type | Sites | Median score (0 to 100) | |---|---:|---:| | Personal injury | 34 | 77 | | Family and estate | 35 | 75 | | Criminal defence and immigration | 30 | 77 | | Small business and employment | 26 | 79 | ## Accessibility and speed | Check | Standard | Sites that fail | |---|---|---:| | Text contrast passes 4.5:1 | WCAG 1.4.3 | 86% | | Loads in under 2.5 s on a phone | Core Web Vitals · LCP | 68% | | LegalService or Attorney structured data | Schema.org · LegalService | 42% | | Images have text descriptions | WCAG 1.1.1 | 12% | ## What this means for agencies For small agencies and freelancers who sell websites to small law firms and solo practitioners. We scanned 125 of their websites: 0% score under 60 out of 100, and 76% leave at least three of the questions clients ask unanswered. Here is where the winnable work is, which problems to lead a pitch with, and how to show them without days of spec design. ### Who is realistic to win Family and estate are the most winnable clients: the lowest median score (75/100), and 0% score under 60. | Type | Sites | Median score | Under 60 | |---|---:|---:|---:| | Personal injury | 34 | 77 | 0% | | Family and estate | 35 | 75 | 0% | | Criminal defence and immigration | 30 | 77 | 0% | | Small business and employment | 26 | 79 | 0% | ### 5 fixable problems to lead a pitch with 1. **Text contrast passes 4.5:1** (86% of sites, quick fix). Fix: Raise text contrast to at least 4.5:1 in the theme. Pitch: "Parts of the site are hard to read, and it is a WCAG failure." 2. **Loads in under 2.5 s on a phone** (68% of sites, build). Fix: Resize and compress the hero image, defer scripts, aim for under 2.5 s on a phone. Pitch: "Your home page takes several seconds to appear on the phone of someone who needs help now." 3. **Can I reach someone now?** (61% of sites, quick fix). Fix: A tappable phone number in the header, with office hours or a stated response time beside it. Pitch: "Someone who needs a lawyer tonight cannot tell from your site whether anyone will answer." 4. **Are they licensed here?** (57% of sites, quick fix). Fix: State on each lawyer's page where they are admitted or licensed to practise, and since when. Pitch: "The first thing a careful client checks is whether you can practise in their state, and the site never says." 5. **Do clients vouch for them?** (55% of sites, quick fix). Fix: Show the firm's client reviews on the site, with Review or AggregateRating markup. Pitch: "Your clients already praise you elsewhere. Your own site does not show it." ### How to show a prospect their problems and a redesign 1. **Lead with their problem, not your services.** Open with one question the site fails, for example text contrast passes 4.5:1 (86% of sites in this report miss it), and show the exact page where the answer should be. 2. **Put a number on it.** Compare their site with the sector: across 125 small law firms and solo practitioners sites, the median scores 76 out of 100 and answers 4 of the 8 questions clients ask. A number travels further inside the client than an opinion. 3. **Show the fix without days of spec work.** A rough redesign that answers those questions persuades better than a proposal, but it usually costs a designer a day or two per prospect. You can sketch it by hand, or use Clikiti: the scan is free and shows any site's problems in about a minute, and paid plans draft a redesign of the home page from the prospect's own brand, from about $2.33 per pitch. ## Best in class: Worgul, Sarna & Ness, Criminal Defense Attorneys, LLC Criminal defence and immigration, Pittsburgh, PA (https://www.pittsburghcriminalattorney.com/). Answers 8 of the 8 client questions tested; loads fast on phones and describes its images; like most sites in this study, it has yet to pass text contrast (WCAG 1.4.3); overall website score 79/100. Named as a positive example; every other site is anonymous. What it does well: - Names its lawyers, each with a profile page of their own - States where its lawyers are admitted to practise: “Bar Admissions Pennsylvania…” - Gives each practice area its own page (120 linked from the home or practice page) - Says what a first conversation costs: “…our office today to schedule a free consultation with a Pittsburgh criminal defense…” - The phone number is a tappable link, and office hours, 24/7 availability or a response time are stated - A message form with 4 fields, so a client can ask without calling - Shows case results or client testimonials - Shows client reviews, marked up for search engines or through a review widget - Real phone visitors see the main content in 2.0 s (Chrome UX Report, 75th percentile; good is 2.5 s or less) - Every image has a text description (WCAG 1.1.1) - Describes the firm to search engines with LegalService or Attorney structured data - Clikiti pillar scores of 90 or more: accessibility 90, SEO 100 Where it could still improve: - Usability pillar 52/100 ## Method - **Sample:** 125 small law firm websites (34 personal injury, 35 family and estate, 30 criminal defence and immigration, 26 small business and employment). - **When:** scanned October 2026; published 2026-10-12. - **How:** the questions are read from the served HTML of each home page and the pages it links to. Load time, contrast and image descriptions come from Google Lighthouse (PageSpeed Insights) in a phone and a desktop render, with Chrome UX Report real-user data where it exists. A check passes only when the scan finds it; each check cites the standard it comes from. - **Score:** Clikiti's overall website score (rubric v2): usability 30%, speed 25%, accessibility 25%, SEO 10%, trust 10%. It measures the website, not the small law firm. The questions are reported separately and do not feed it. - **Margin of error:** shares are exact for the sites scanned. Read as estimates for all small law firm websites, they carry a margin of error of up to ±8.8 percentage points at 95% confidence (worst case, p = 0.5, n = 125). - **Privacy:** results are published as aggregates or anonymously. Sites are listed by name in the appendix with no individual results; only the best-in-class example is named with its results. ## License and citation Free to use and cite under CC BY 4.0. Credit Clikiti with a link. License: [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). APA: Clikiti. (2026, October 12). The state of law firm websites 2026 (Q4 2026) [Report]. https://clikiti.com/research/law/2026-q4 Embed the chart (HTML): ```html
Chart: share of small law firm websites answering each question clients ask (Q4 2026)
Source: Clikiti, The State of Law Firm Websites 2026 (Q4 2026). CC BY 4.0.
``` ## Links - Full report with charts: https://clikiti.com/research/law/2026-q4 - PDF: https://clikiti.com/research/law/2026-q4/report.pdf - Aggregate data (JSON): https://clikiti.com/research/law/2026-q4/data.json - Aggregate data (CSV): https://clikiti.com/research/law/2026-q4/data.csv - All Clikiti research: https://clikiti.com/research - Scan your own site free: https://clikiti.com/ Clikiti scans websites for usability, accessibility (WCAG 2.2 AA) and speed, and helps small agencies and freelancers show prospects their problems and a redesign without days of spec work. ## Appendix A: Methodology 125 websites, 4 types of organisation, 43 states, read on 2026-10-12. Margin of error ±8.8 points at 95% confidence. ### A1. The research question When someone with a legal problem looks for a lawyer online, usually on a phone, can they find out who will handle the case, whether that lawyer is licensed, what it costs to talk and how to reach someone quickly? Population: Solo practitioners, small firms and boutiques in the United States (about 2 to 25 lawyers) in four practice groups: the firms a small or mid-size web agency can realistically win as clients. ### A2. Who was studied | Source | What it contributes | Sites | |---|---|---:| | Local search, personal injury | Personal injury firms found in local search results, city by city | 34 | | Local search, family and estate | Family law and estate planning firms found in local search results, city by city | 36 | | Local search, criminal and immigration | Criminal defence, DUI and immigration firms found in local search results, city by city | 29 | | Local search, business and employment | Small business, employment and transactional firms found in local search results, city by city | 26 | Included: - A solo practice, small firm or boutique with its own website (not a directory or marketplace profile) - Based in the United States - Home page responds and shows the firm it claims to be (each home page title was checked before scanning) Excluded: - Large firms: Am Law 200 and NLJ 500 firms, and firms with about 50 or more lawyers or offices in three or more states - National advertising brands that operate across many states under one name - Legal marketplaces and directory profiles, online legal-document services and lead-generation sites - Legal aid, nonprofits, public defenders, government and law schools - Parked, placeholder, password-protected or unreachable sites, and duplicates | From list to sample | Sites | |---|---:| | Candidates listed | 144 | | Removed at screening: the site refused automated visitors (15) | -15 | | Removed at editorial review | 0 | | Cohort | 129 | | Removed because Google returned no phone speed test for the site | -4 | | Studied in this edition | 125 | | Region (US Census) | Personal injury | Family and estate | Criminal defence and immigration | Small business and employment | All | |---|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:| | Northeast | 9 | 8 | 8 | 6 | 31 | | Midwest | 8 | 7 | 7 | 6 | 28 | | South | 8 | 11 | 8 | 8 | 35 | | West | 9 | 9 | 7 | 6 | 31 | ### A3. How the sites were read - Pages: The home page, then for each of six topics (attorneys, about, practice areas, results, reviews, contact) the best-matching link on the home page, and one lawyer's profile page linked from the attorneys page. - Speed and accessibility: Google PageSpeed Insights (Lighthouse) on a mid-range phone profile and on desktop, plus Chrome UX Report data from real visitors over the previous 28 days where Google publishes it for the site. - Crawler conduct: One request at a time to each site, at least 400 ms apart, at most ten pages per site; robots.txt is read and obeyed for every page requested; a site that refuses is left out and never retried. User agent: `Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; ClikitiResearch/1.0; +https://clikiti.com)`. ### A4. What was measured | Question | Counts as answered when | Standard | |---|---|---| | Who will handle my case? (Lawyers named, each with a profile) | At least one lawyer is named with their own page in an attorneys, team or people section of the site. | Clikiti client question 1 of 8 | | Are they licensed here? (Bar admission or licence stated) | A profile, attorneys or about page states where the lawyer is admitted or licensed to practise (for example "admitted to the Ohio bar" or "licensed to practice in Texas"). | Clikiti client question 2 of 8 | | Do they handle my kind of case? (Each practice area on its own page) | At least three practice areas each have their own page, linked from the home page or the practice-areas page. | Clikiti client question 3 of 8 | | What does it cost to talk? (Consultation cost stated) | The site states what a first conversation costs: a free consultation or case review, a fixed consultation fee, or no fee unless the case is won. | Clikiti client question 4 of 8 | | Can I reach someone now? (Tappable phone plus hours or response time) | The home page has a tappable phone link, and the home or contact page states office hours, 24/7 availability or a response time. | Clikiti client question 5 of 8 | | Can I ask without calling? (Message form with five fields or fewer) | A message form is in the page as the server delivers it, on the home or contact page, with five or fewer fields to fill in. | Clikiti client question 6 of 8 | | Have they won cases like mine? (Case results or client testimonials shown) | Case results, verdicts, settlements or client testimonials are shown on the site. | Clikiti client question 7 of 8 | | Do clients vouch for them? (Reviews marked up or shown in a widget) | Client reviews are marked up for search engines (Review or AggregateRating structured data) or shown through a review widget. | Clikiti client question 8 of 8 | | Loads in under 2.5 s on a phone (Loads in under 2.5 s on a phone) | Real visitors on phones see the main content within 2.5 seconds (Chrome UX Report, 75th percentile). Where Google publishes no visitor data, the phone lab test is used. | Core Web Vitals · LCP | | Text contrast passes 4.5:1 (Text contrast passes 4.5:1) | No text on the home page fails the WCAG 1.4.3 minimum contrast of 4.5:1, in either the phone or desktop test. | WCAG 1.4.3 | | Images have text descriptions (Images have text descriptions) | Every meaningful image on the home page has a text description (WCAG 1.1.1). | WCAG 1.1.1 | | LegalService or Attorney structured data (LegalService or Attorney structured data) | The site describes the firm to search engines with LegalService or Attorney structured data. | Schema.org · LegalService | ### A5. The website score Clikiti website score, rubric 2.0.0: a weighted mean of usability 30%, speed 25%, accessibility 25%, search 10% and trust 10%. It measures the website, not the organisation; the questions above do not feed it. Report-card letters: A 90+, B 75+, C 45+, D 30+, F below 30. ### A6. Precision ±8.8 points overall at 95% confidence (worst case p = 0.5, 1.96 × √(0.25/n)); by type: personal injury ±16.8 (n = 34); family and estate ±16.6 (n = 35); criminal defence and immigration ±17.9 (n = 30); small business and employment ±19.2 (n = 26). ### A7. Quality control - Every home page in the cohort was fetched and its title checked against the listed firm before scanning - Detection rules were checked against the evidence they record for a sample of firms in every practice group, and revised before the final run - Every published figure is recomputed from the data at build time, and a statement in the text that the data does not support stops the build - Results are published only after automated checks for missing data, anonymity, accessibility of the report itself and the margin of error statement pass ### A8. Limitations - A point-in-time snapshot: sites change, and a site may have improved or declined since it was read. - Only public pages were read: the home page, pages it links to and one lawyer profile. Client portals, chat widgets and multi-step intake were not tested. - Answers are read from the page as a server delivers it. Content that only appears after scripts run in the browser (some contact forms and review widgets, for example) is not seen, which the study counts as a gap a search engine or a slow phone would also meet. - The study reports what a website shows. It does not assess whether any firm complies with the advertising or ethics rules of any state bar, and nothing in it is legal advice. - Automated accessibility tests find only part of what WCAG covers; keyboard and screen-reader use need a manual audit. - The sample is a structured list of real, independent firms, not a random draw. Margins of error are given as a guide to precision, not as a guarantee that the results hold for every firm in the country. ## Appendix B: firms in this study Who was scanned, and nothing more: results are shown only in aggregate or anonymously. ### Personal injury (34) - [Adler Law Group, LLC](https://www.adlerlawgroupllc.com/), Hartford, CT - [Baer Law Office](https://www.baerlawoffice.com/), Des Moines, IA - [Big River Trial Attorneys](https://bigriverlaw.com/), Baton Rouge, LA - [Brent Harsh Law](https://brentharshlaw.com/), Reno, NV - [Chain Cohn Clark](https://www.chainlaw.com/), Bakersfield, CA - [Chhabra, Gibbs & Gustavis, P.A.](https://cglawms.com/), Jackson, MS - [Combies Hanson, P.C.](https://combieshanson.com/), Boston, MA - [Crary & Domanico, P.S.](https://ccdlaw.com/), Spokane, WA - [Fales & Fales, P.A.](https://www.faleslaw.com/), Lewiston, ME - [Finderson Law](https://findersonlaw.com/), Fort Wayne, IN - [Heenan & Cook, PLLC](https://www.lawmontana.com/), Billings, MT - [James A. Fein, Attorney](https://www.tucsonlaw.net/), Tucson, AZ - [Johnson Janklow Abdallah, LLP](https://janklowabdallah.com/), Sioux Falls, SD - [Jones, Boykin & Associates, P.C.](https://www.jonesboykinsav.com/), Savannah, GA - [Kenison Law Office, PLLC](https://www.kenisonlaw.com/), Manchester, NH - [Knowles Law Firm](https://www.knowleslawfirm.com/), Omaha, NE - [Lantz & Robins, P.C.](https://lantzrobins.com/), Richmond, VA - [Law Office of David I. Schoen](https://www.vtinjurylaw.com/), West Windsor, VT - [Law Offices of Jeff Martin](https://jeffmartinlaw.com/), Tulsa, OK - [LawtonCates, S.C.](https://www.lawtoncates.com/), Madison, WI - [Louis W. Grande Injury Lawyer](https://louisgrande.com/), Providence, RI - [Mann Wyatt Tanksley Injury Attorneys](https://www.mannwyatt.com/), Wichita, KS - [McCormick & Murphy, P.C.](https://mccormickmurphy.com/), Colorado Springs, CO - [McMath Woods P.A.](https://www.mcmathlaw.com/), Little Rock, AR - [Pisanchyn Law Firm](https://pisanchynlawfirm.com/), Scranton, PA - [Powers & Santola, LLP](https://powers-santola.com/), Albany, NY - [Rizk Law](https://www.rizklaw.com/), Portland, OR - [Rossman Law Group](https://rossmanlaw.com/), Boise, ID - [Strong Law Offices](https://www.stronglawoffices.com/), Peoria, IL - [The Donahey Law Firm](https://www.donaheylaw.com/), Columbus, OH - [Towey Law PLLC](https://www.briantoweylaw.com/), Buffalo, NY - [Uricchio Law Firm](https://www.uricchiolawfirm.com/), Charleston, SC - [Varellas & Varellas](https://www.varellaslaw.com/), Lexington, KY - [Will Ferguson & Associates](https://www.fergusonlaw.com/), Albuquerque, NM ### Family and estate (35) - [Anderson Elder Law](https://www.andersonelderlaw.com/), West Chester, PA - [Atkinson & Kelsey, P.A.](https://atkinsonkelsey.com/), Albuquerque, NM - [Banas Family Law, P.A.](https://www.banasfamilylaw.com/), St. Paul, MN - [Burke & Casserly, P.C.](https://www.burkecasserly.com/), Albany, NY - [Cadicina Law, LLC](https://www.cadicinalaw.com/), Morristown, NJ - [Colorado Estate Planning](https://coloradoestateplan.com/), Colorado Springs, CO - [David A. Hawley, P.A.](https://www.hawleylaw.com/), Wichita, KS - [Denker Law Firm LLC](https://www.denkerlawfirm.com/), Lee's Summit, MO - [Eric M. Swinyard & Associates, PLLC](https://utahdivorce.com/), South Jordan, UT - [Franklin & Kyle Elder Law, LLC](https://www.franklinkyle.com/), Knoxville, TN - [Graunke Ayoub Law](https://www.graunke-ayoub.com/), Seattle, WA - [Hildebrand Law, P.C.](https://www.hildebrandlaw.com/), Tempe, AZ - [Idaho Elder Law](https://idahoelderlaw.com/), Boise, ID - [Kirker Davis LLP](https://www.kirkerdavis.com/), Austin, TX - [Kraayeveld Law Offices, P.C.](https://www.kraayeveld.com/), Grand Rapids, MI - [Lacy Law Office, LLC](https://www.lacylawoffice.com/), Indianapolis, IN - [McCormick, Fitzpatrick, Kasper & Burchard, P.C.](https://www.mc-fitz.com/), Burlington, VT - [Miller Cushing Holladay PLLC](https://www.mchpllc.com/), Charlotte, NC - [Music City Estate Law](https://musiccityestatelaw.com/), Nashville, TN - [Nennig Law Offices, LLC](https://protectingfamilies.net/), Madison, WI - [Popovitch Law LLC](https://popovitchlaw.com/), Lexington, MA - [Ramos Law Group, PLLC](https://www.ramosfamilylaw.com/), Houston, TX - [Richter Family Law Group, P.C.](https://www.rivercitylaw.com/), Memphis, TN - [Samuels Yoelin Kantor LLP](https://samuelslaw.com/), Portland, OR - [Sekella Law, PLLC](https://sekellalaw.com/), Manchester, NH - [Slepkow Law LLC](https://www.slepkowlaw.com/), East Providence, RI - [Tampa Bay Elder Law](https://www.tampabayelderlaw.com/), Lutz, FL - [The Gubinsky Law Firm P.C.](https://www.pittsburgh-divorce.net/), Pittsburgh, PA - [The Hive Law](https://www.thehivelaw.com/), Buford, GA - [The Yeatts Law Firm, LLC](https://yeattslawfirm.com/), Birmingham, AL - [Tresp Law, APC](https://tresplaw.com/), San Diego, CA - [Wagner Law Office, PLLC](https://www.wendiwagnerlaw.com/), Louisville, KY - [Ward Family Law, LLC](https://wardfamilylawchicago.com/), Chicago, IL - [Wiles Law Firm, LLC](https://wileslawfirm.com/), Charleston, SC - [Willick Law Group](https://www.willicklawgroup.com/), Las Vegas, NV ### Criminal defence and immigration (30) - [Apsan Law Offices LLC](https://www.apsanlaw.com/), Newark, NJ - [Arca Law](https://www.arcalaw.com/), Marietta, GA - [Arnold & Smith, PLLC](https://www.arnoldsmithlaw.com/), Charlotte, NC - [Banks & Brower](https://banksbrower.com/), Indianapolis, IN - [Bernstein & Mello, P.L.L.C.](https://bernsteinmello.com/), Nashua, NH - [Byron Pugh Legal](https://byronpughlegal.com/), Nashville, TN - [Choquette Immigration Law Group](https://www.choquettelaw.com/), Seattle, WA - [Chris Hammond Law Firm](https://chrishammondlaw.com/), Houston, TX - [Davidson & Seseri](https://davidsonseseri.com/), Chicago, IL - [Edgerton Immigration Law](https://www.edgertonimmigration.com/), Raleigh, NC - [Elcox Law](https://elcoxlaw.com/), Boise, ID - [ENTRYLAW (Parrilli Renison LLC)](https://www.entrylaw.com/), Portland, OR - [Feist Law & Advocacy PLLC](https://www.feistlaw.com/), Minneapolis, MN - [Goldstein Mehta LLC](https://goldsteinmehta.com/), Philadelphia, PA - [Jaffe, Hanle, Whisonant & Knight, P.C.](https://www.rjaffelaw.com/), Birmingham, AL - [KC Defense Counsel](https://kcdefensecounsel.com/), Kansas City, MO - [Konstantakis Law Office, LLC](https://konstantakislaw.com/), Greenfield, WI - [Law Office of Marilyn Orbach-Rosenberg](https://www.orbachrosenberglaw.com/), Queens, NY - [LV Criminal Defense](https://www.lvcriminaldefense.com/), Las Vegas, NV - [Nemann Law Offices, LLC](https://www.nemannlawoffices.com/), Columbus, OH - [Perez & Malik, PLLC](https://perezmalik.com/), San Antonio, TX - [Petrash Law](https://petrashlaw.com/), Denver, CO - [Romanovsky Law Offices](https://romanovskylaw.com/), Boston, MA - [Salwin Law Group](https://www.salwinlaw.com/), Scottsdale, AZ - [Sammis Law Firm](https://criminaldefenseattorneytampa.com/), Tampa, FL - [SBBL Law (Springstead Bartish Borgula & Lynch PLLC)](https://sbbllaw.com/), Grand Rapids, MI - [Serpa Law Office](https://www.serpalaw.com/), Boston, MA - [Vrapi Weeks](https://vrapiweeks.com/), Albuquerque, NM - [Woolf & Ross Law Firm](https://www.connecticutcriminallawyer.com/), East Hartford, CT - [Worgul, Sarna & Ness, Criminal Defense Attorneys, LLC](https://www.pittsburghcriminalattorney.com/), Pittsburgh, PA ### Small business and employment (26) - [Aeton Law Partners](https://www.aetonlaw.com/), Hartford, CT - [Anthony Law, LLC](https://anthonylawllc.com/), Columbus, OH - [As Your Counsel](https://www.asyourcounsel.com/), Portland, OR - [Bowes, Petkovich & Palmer, LLC](https://bpp-law.com/), Gretna, LA - [Colligan Law LLP](https://www.colliganlaw.com/), Buffalo, NY - [Dozier Miller Law Group](https://doziermillerlaw.com/), Charlotte, NC - [Exceed Legal](https://exceed.legal/), Boise, ID - [Fleckenstein Young & Pearson, PC](https://www.pf-law.com/), Richmond, VA - [Holden Law Firm](https://holdenlawfirm.com/), Minnetonka, MN - [Holmes Business Law](https://phillysmallbusinesslawyer.com/), Philadelphia, PA - [Hones Law PLLC](https://www.honeslaw.com/), Seattle, WA - [Horgan Law, P.L.L.C.](https://horganlawfirm.com/), Omaha, NE - [J.D. Milliner & Associates, P.C.](https://www.jdmilliner.com/), Salt Lake City, UT - [Joseph C. Russo, P.A.](https://josephcrussolaw.com/), Tampa, FL - [Kane Law Office](https://www.bkanelaw.com/), Kansas City, MO - [Krupp Law Offices PC](https://grandrapidsbankruptcylawyer.com/), Grand Rapids, MI - [Law Office of E.C. Lewis, P.C.](https://www.eclewis.com/), Denver, CO - [Law Offices of Christopher Bent, LLC](https://cbentlaw.com/), St. Louis, MO - [M.V. Parker Law, PLLC](https://mvparkerlaw.com/), Albuquerque, NM - [Moore Law PC](https://moorefirm.co/), Nashville, TN - [Schubert Law Offices](https://www.schubertlawnh.com/), Manchester, NH - [Tempus Fugit Law](https://tempusfugitlaw.com/), Boston, MA - [The Blake Law Firm](https://theblakefirm.com/), Austin, TX - [The Forsythe Law Firm](https://www.forsythelawfirm.com/), Atlanta, GA - [The Potash Law Firm](https://www.potashlawfirm.com/), Louisville, KY - [Wick & Maddocks](https://wickandmaddocks.com/), Burlington, VT ## Disclaimer This report is based on automated scans of publicly available home pages, and pages they link to, run on 2026-10-12. Its findings are a point-in-time technical snapshot of each website. They are not a judgement of any firm's legal work, ethics or quality, and automated checks may contain errors. This report is not legal advice, and it is not a judgement of whether any firm complies with the advertising or ethics rules of any bar. Clikiti is not affiliated with, and does not endorse, any firm listed here; trademarks belong to their owners. The report is provided "as is" under CC BY 4.0, without warranty of any kind. Photographs are illustrations created with generative AI; every person shown is fictional. The usability review is carried out by an automated vision model under the rules in A5. **[Remove my firm from this study](mailto:hello@clikiti.com?subject=Remove%20my%20firm%20from%20the%20State%20of%20Law%20Firm%20Websites%20study&body=Please%20remove%20my%20firm%20from%20this%20study.%0A%0AFirm%20name%3A%0AFirm%20website%3A%0AMy%20role%20at%20the%20firm%3A%0AHow%20to%20contact%20me%3A)** We review every request and reply when it's done; removed firms are excluded from future editions.