This review compares 4 named client case studies across family law, criminal defense, immigration and Social Security disability. It reports each outcome with its source period and limitation.
Published 7 August 2026. This is a case series, not an industry benchmark.
4 named client case studies
Family LawFrom no attributable ads revenue to a measurable case pipeline$105k+
Criminal DefenseA criminal defense pipeline built around calls and organic demand1,235
ImmigrationMore qualified consultation demand for an immigration practice400%
Social Security Disability5X the conversions from a smaller Google Ads budget+410%Client-specific historical outcomes. They are not forecasts or guarantees.
Executive summary
The 4 studies do not measure the same endpoint. Two connect marketing with retained cases or closed revenue. Two stop at consultation quality, campaign conversions or open quote value. The review keeps those reporting levels separate.
| Client and period | Recorded outcome | Attribution source | Reporting limitation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cage & Miles LLPFamily Law, First 3 months | $316k+ in closed case revenue586 recorded case leads | WhatConverts closed matter values joined with paid and organic search sources | Individual lead-quality tags were not maintained consistently during the source period. |
| DRD Law LLCCriminal Defense, 12 months | $197 recorded acquisition cost per retained case1,235 recorded case leads | Google Ads, Search Console and channel-to-case reporting | Client lead outcomes were incomplete and may understate retained-case performance. |
| Gogozing MigrationImmigration, 12 months | 400% more consultation bookings4x qualified case leads | Approved channel, landing-page and consultation comparison | Underlying booking totals are not published, so the review uses the approved percentage changes only. |
| Melanson Law GroupSocial Security Disability, Two equal 70-day periods | Conversions rose from 10 to 51 as spend decreased 17%$63k in open quote value | Google Ads, Search Console and WhatConverts | Open quote value is not closed revenue. 57 of 140 enquiries were ungraded. |
Outcome depth
The other two reached qualified consultations, campaign conversions or open quote value. Those outcomes belong at different stages of intake and should not be pooled into one return figure.
Channel evidence
The review keeps each channel result beside its source. It does not assign a blended return where the available reporting cannot support one.
Reporting boundary
Calls, forms, consultations, retained cases, closed revenue and open quotes answer different questions. The useful reporting level depends on what the firm records consistently.
The case-study library
Each study explains the commercial problem, the work completed, the source period and the gaps that still matter when reading the result.
Family Law
3 months$105k+
Monthly case revenue
586
Tracked case leads
Criminal Defense
12 months1,235
Tracked case leads
598%
Organic growth
Immigration
12 months400%
More bookings
4x
Qualified case leads
Social Security Disability
70 days+410%
Google Ads conversions
−84%
Cost per conversion
How to read the evidence
That is why the studies do more than publish the best percentage. They show the starting position, decisions, timeframe and reporting boundary.
What the account, website and reporting could show before the work began.
The campaign, page, SEO and intake changes made during the engagement.
The dates and comparison window behind the published numbers.
The leads, consultations, matters or search gains the available systems support.
Campaign evidence
Source-labelled proof graphics and approved screenshots sit beside the explanation they support. Open the study for the dates, metric definitions and reporting notes.
Questions about the results
Past work can show how the team thinks and measures. It cannot promise the same outcome in another market.
No. Each result belongs to the named client and source period. Market competition, budget, reputation, case mix, intake and follow-up all affect performance. The case studies show what happened, not what another firm is guaranteed to receive.
Start with the position before the work began, the timeframe, the changes made and the source of each number. A useful case study connects marketing activity with calls, consultations or retained matters instead of relying on clicks and rankings alone.
Platform conversions are one part of the record. We connect available campaign, call, form and intake outcomes while stating any gaps in the source data. Google’s conversion tracking guidance explains how actions can be measured after an ad interaction.
The metric depends on what the client recorded consistently and approved for publication. Revenue is shown only when it was connected to the reporting source. Other studies use tracked case leads, consultation bookings, acquisition costs or search growth with the relevant limitation beside them.
We keep the client, timeframe, source and limitations beside the result. Past performance is not presented as a promise. ABA Model Rule 7.1 is a useful baseline, while each firm remains responsible for the rules in its jurisdiction.