A law firm site is governed by conduct rules that most web developers have never read, carries a form that can create a duty of confidentiality before anyone has agreed to anything, and is worth roughly whatever the intake behind it is worth. Treating it as an ordinary build is how firms end up with a handsome site and an ethics problem.
The conduct rules apply to every page
Communications about a lawyer's services may not be false or misleading, and the model rules and their state adoptions cover claims of specialisation, past results, testimonials and the identification of the responsible lawyer. Jurisdictions differ, sometimes materially, so the build should be reviewed against the rules of every state the firm is admitted in rather than against a general idea of what looks compliant.
The contact form is a confidentiality question
A prospective client who sends details through the site may have a reasonable expectation that what they sent is protected, which can create conflicts before intake has even run a check. The usual answer is a clear notice at the form, a narrow set of fields, and a workflow that runs a conflicts check before anyone reads the detail. This is a legal design decision, not a UX one, and it belongs to the firm rather than the developer.
Intake is where the value is decided
Most firms lose more matters to a slow response than to a weak website. Before the build, decide who answers, within what time, and what happens out of hours. Instrument the form and the phone so that the number of enquiries and the time to first response are both visible. A site that doubles enquiries into an intake that cannot answer them has doubled nothing.
Accessibility and the plain build questions
Public-facing sites are increasingly expected to meet a recognised accessibility standard, and remediation after launch costs several times what building to the standard does. Beyond that the ordinary rules apply: fast pages, a structure a reader can follow, and one practice area per page rather than a single page trying to rank for everything.
Questions people ask about attorney web development
Can the site say we are specialists?
It depends on the state and on certification. Several jurisdictions restrict claims of specialisation to certified fields, which is exactly why the copy needs a review against the rules where the firm practises.
Can we publish case results?
Often yes, with qualifications, and several states require a disclaimer that past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Get the wording from the applicable rule rather than from another firm's site.
Who should own the site?
The firm. Accounts, domain and content should be in the firm's name, with the developer as a user who can be removed.
What does a law firm site cost?
It varies by size and practice area count. The build is rarely the expensive part; the review, the content and the intake integration are what a realistic budget covers.