Wrong-fit AI leads → 2 signed clients in 4 months

This firm came in with AI presence already — ChatGPT was surfacing their name to Marylanders asking about injury attorneys. But every AI-sourced lead was wrong: wrong jurisdiction, wrong case type, no claim, or already settled. Five leads in two months, zero signed. The problem wasn't whether AI mentioned them. It was what AI mentioned them for.

Overall AI visibility at 4% across Google AI Overviews, ChatGPT, Perplexity and Gemini. Presence concentrated on prompts mismatched to the firm's practice focus. Baseline lead quality: 0 signed from 5 AI-sourced inquiries in the prior two months.

Foundation and targeting work in English and Spanish — re-pointing the firm's AI signal toward the case types and jurisdiction it actually handles, then building the mentions, listings and content that corroborate it. (Phase-level by design; the sequence is our method.)

Visibility tripled within 10 days and peaked at 46% by week six, holding 21%+ sustained. #1 brand position and 100% Share of Voice on the market's top slip-and-fall prompt, featured in Google AI Overview. And the number that matters: two signed clients traced directly to ChatGPT — attribution tracked in the firm's intake system — versus 0-for-5 before the engagement.

Visibility isn't the goal — being recommended for the right cases is. See where you stand. → Get your Trust Index