Short answer: Michigan attorney advertising is governed by Rules 7.1 through 7.5 of the Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct. The provisions are relatively terse, there is no filing requirement, and on the conventional questions Michigan is unremarkable. The real exposure on a Michigan law firm website is different in kind: substantive legal content that has quietly gone out of date. This guide sets out the Michigan attorney advertising rules that apply to a law firm website, and where firms most often fall short.
Michigan substantially reformed its no-fault auto insurance system. That reform changed the actual substance of what an enormous volume of Michigan personal injury web content was describing — coverage levels, benefit entitlements, the choices a claimant faces. A great deal of that content is still live, still ranking, and still describing the previous position.
Stale content is a misleading communication
Firms treat compliance as a launch task. The site is reviewed before it goes live, signed off, and then not looked at again except to add pages.
The rule against false or misleading communications contains no exception for statements that were accurate when published. A page explaining what benefits a Michigan claimant is entitled to, written against a superseded version of the statute, is capable of misleading a reader who finds it today. Nothing about the page has changed; the law underneath it has.
This is a genuinely under-discussed risk because it is invisible from the inside. Nobody edited the page. It simply became wrong.
Why Michigan is the clearest example
Every state changes its law, so this risk exists everywhere. Michigan is the sharpest illustration for three reasons.
First, no-fault auto is a high-volume practice area, so the affected content is extensive rather than niche. Second, the reform changed things a prospective client would specifically search for — what am I entitled to, what should I choose — which is exactly the content firms wrote to attract traffic. Third, that content ranks, which means it continues to be found.
The result is a large body of well-optimised Michigan pages answering a question with a superseded answer. From a search perspective they are assets. From a compliance perspective they are liabilities, and the better they rank the larger the liability.
A review cycle, not a launch check
| Content type | Review trigger |
|---|---|
| Pages describing statutory entitlements | Any amendment to the governing statute |
| Pages citing damages caps or thresholds | Annual, plus on amendment |
| Pages describing procedure or deadlines | On any rule change |
| Attorney bios and admissions | On any personnel change |
| Past results and case outcomes | Annual, for continued accuracy |
| Fee and cost descriptions | On any change to fee agreements |
The cheapest practical measure is a visible last-reviewed date on every page describing substantive law. It makes the review cycle auditable, it tells a reader how much weight to give the page, and it creates the internal prompt that otherwise never arrives. It also happens to be a quality signal that search engines and AI assistants can use, which is a rare case of a compliance measure paying for itself in visibility.
The advertising rules themselves
Conventional. Rule 7.1 addresses false and misleading communications. Specialist claims require certification. Comparative superlatives require substantiation. Enforcement runs through the Attorney Grievance Commission after the fact, with no pre-filing step. If you have built to the standard described in the Illinois or Ohio guides, Michigan will not surprise you.
What will surprise you is the audit. Most Michigan firms have never run one across their existing content.
Michigan attorney advertising rules: frequently asked questions
Which rules govern attorney advertising in Michigan?
The Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct, principally Rules 7.1 through 7.5. Michigan’s advertising provisions are relatively terse compared with states such as Louisiana or New York, and there is no pre-filing requirement.
Can outdated legal content on my website be an ethics problem?
Potentially yes, and this is the point most firms miss. The prohibition is on false or misleading communications, and it does not contain an exception for statements that were accurate when published. A page describing a superseded version of the law is capable of misleading a reader today.
Why does this matter particularly in Michigan?
Michigan substantially reformed its no-fault auto insurance system, which changed the substance of what a large volume of Michigan personal injury web content described. Pages written before those reforms may still be live and still describing the previous position.
Does Michigan require a pre-filing review of advertising?
No. Michigan has no filing or pre-approval requirement, so enforcement is after the fact through the Attorney Grievance Commission on complaint.
How often should legal content on a law firm website be reviewed?
There is no prescribed interval, but content describing substantive law needs a review cycle rather than a launch check. A dated last-reviewed line on each substantive page is the simplest way to make the cycle visible and auditable.
Michigan attorney advertising rules: the short version
If you take one thing from this guide, take this: the Michigan attorney advertising rules apply to every page a prospective client can reach, including campaign landing pages built outside your main website. That is usually where the gaps are.
Official source: the State Bar of Michigan.
Legal Web Agency is a marketing agency, not a law firm, and nothing here is legal advice. No statutory provision, benefit level, threshold or effective date is quoted, and the no-fault reforms are described only in general terms. Have substantive content reviewed by Michigan counsel, not by your marketing agency.
Related reading: Attorney Advertising Rules by State, plus the Illinois, Ohio and Washington guides.
