What is an AI voice receptionist for attorneys?

An AI voice receptionist for attorneys is a system that answers your phone calls 24/7, conducts a professional intake conversation with callers, and emails you a full summary — including the caller's name, number, email, practice area, and preferred callback time — within 60 seconds. Presently is built specifically for solo and small law firms.

How much does Presently cost?

Presently is $8,150 per year for standard access. Founding firms who join during our early access period pay $4,000 per year — a rate that is locked in for life. There are no per-call fees, no overage charges, and no long-term contracts beyond the annual subscription.

Does Presently integrate with Clio or other legal practice management software?

Presently delivers intake summaries by email immediately after each call. Integration with Clio, MyCase, and other practice management platforms is on the product roadmap. Founding firms will be the first to access native integrations when they launch.

Can Presently answer calls in Spanish?

Yes. Presently conducts intake conversations in both English and Spanish. If a caller begins speaking Spanish, Presently automatically continues the conversation in Spanish and delivers the intake summary to you in English.

How quickly do I receive the intake summary after a call?

You receive a full intake summary by email within 60 seconds of the call ending. The summary includes the caller's full name, best callback number, email address, practice area, preferred callback time, urgency level, and any additional notes the caller shared.

What practice areas does Presently support?

Presently is trained to handle intake for estate planning, personal injury, employment law, family law and divorce, criminal defense, and general matters. For each practice area, Presently asks the right follow-up questions — for example, asking personal injury callers about treatment status and insurance contact.

How does call forwarding work with Presently?

You forward calls to your Presently number using your existing carrier's call forwarding feature — typically by dialing a short code on your phone. No hardware or app is required. Setup takes under five minutes and can be activated or deactivated instantly.

Is Presently compliant with call recording laws?

Yes. Presently discloses at the start of every call that the call will be recorded and transcribed for intake purposes, and identifies itself as an AI assistant. This disclosure satisfies federal one-party consent requirements and is designed to meet two-party consent requirements in states like California, Florida, and Washington.

Can Presently handle multiple calls at the same time?

Yes. Presently handles simultaneous calls — every caller reaches a live AI immediately regardless of how many calls come in at once. There is no queue, no hold music, and no missed calls due to the line being busy.

What happens after Presently takes a message?

As soon as the call ends, you receive an email with the full intake summary. The summary flags urgent matters and high-priority leads so you can triage quickly. You call the client back directly — Presently handles the intake so you can focus on the follow-up that wins the case.

What is ABA Formal Opinion 512 and why does it matter for AI intake?

ABA Formal Opinion 512 establishes that attorneys who deploy AI tools must understand how those tools work, supervise their outputs, and ensure they do not violate professional conduct rules. The deploying attorney — not the vendor — holds responsibility. For AI intake tools, this means the attorney must know whether the AI is capturing information or making legal determinations.

What is the difference between AI that captures information and AI that gives legal assessments?

AI that captures information asks structured intake questions — name, contact details, what happened, what kind of help is needed — and delivers the answers to the attorney for review. AI that gives legal assessments evaluates the strength of a claim, advises on legal options, or makes determinations about a caller's case. The second category raises UPL risk. The attorney receives nothing to review before legal information is transmitted to the caller.

Attorney Ethics · AI Intake · ABA Formal Opinion 512

Can AI Legal Intake Constitute Unauthorized Practice of Law?

ABA Formal Opinion 512 makes the deploying attorney personally responsible for AI tools used in their practice. Here is what that means before you choose a vendor.

Hear Presently Answer — Call (518) 722-2552

The Direct Answer

Yes — if the AI makes legal assessments without attorney supervision.

When an AI intake system evaluates the strength of a legal claim, advises a caller on their options, or makes determinations about their case without an attorney reviewing those outputs first, it may be practicing law. Under ABA Formal Opinion 512, the attorney who deployed the tool — not the vendor — is the one responsible.

Over 35 state bars have now issued AI guidance under this framework. The Alabama State Bar issued guidance in July 2026 that a firm chatbot answering legal questions without attorney review may constitute UPL, with the deploying lawyer personally accountable. Alabama is one illustration of where enforcement is heading — Op. 512 is the national framework.

The Line That Matters

Information capture vs. legal assessment — that is the distinction your bar cares about.

Information Capture ✓

What is your name and contact information?
What happened and when?
What kind of legal help are you looking for?
How urgent is your situation?
Delivers everything to the attorney for review

Attorney reviews before any determination is made. Aligned with Op. 512.

Legal Assessment ✗

Evaluates whether the caller has a viable claim
Advises on legal options or likely outcomes
Recommends a course of action
Transmits legal determinations before attorney review

UPL risk. Deploying attorney is accountable under Op. 512.

The question to ask every vendor: Does your AI give legal assessments, or does it capture information for attorney review? If they cannot answer clearly, that is your answer.

ABA Formal Opinion 512

The deploying attorney is responsible — not the vendor.

ABA Formal Opinion 512 establishes three duties for attorneys who deploy AI tools in their practice:

Duty of competence — understand how the AI tool works, including its limitations and failure modes.
Duty of supervision — ensure the AI's outputs are reviewed before they affect a client or prospective client.
Duty of confidentiality — verify how the vendor stores, uses, and trains on client intake data.

The Opinion does not prohibit AI intake tools. It requires attorney governance over them. An AI that operates without attorney review in the loop is not compatible with Op. 512 compliance — regardless of what the vendor's marketing materials say.

How Presently Is Built

Intake capture. Attorney review. No legal assessments.

Presently is designed around one principle: the AI captures, the attorney decides.

When a prospective client calls after hours, Presently answers in the firm's name, asks structured intake questions, and delivers a complete summary to the supervising attorney within 60 seconds of the call ending — before any consultation is scheduled, before any legal determination is made, before the client receives anything from your firm other than confirmation that their information was received.

Presently does not evaluate claims. It does not advise callers on their legal options. It does not make determinations about case viability. That is the attorney's job — and Presently is built to protect it, not replace it.

Presently's architecture under Op. 512:

AI captures structured intake — caller information, matter type, urgency
Summary delivered to attorney in under 60 seconds
Attorney reviews before any consultation is scheduled
Client receives confirmation only — no legal information
Callback initiated — attorney decides next step

Frequently Asked Questions

Attorney questions about AI intake and ethics rules

Can an AI legal intake system constitute unauthorized practice of law?

Yes — if the AI gives legal assessments, evaluates the strength of a claim, or advises a caller on their legal options without attorney supervision, it may constitute UPL. ABA Formal Opinion 512 holds the deploying attorney personally responsible for supervising AI tools used in their practice.

Is the law firm or the AI vendor responsible for UPL violations?

The deploying attorney is responsible. The Alabama State Bar issued guidance in July 2026 that a firm chatbot answering legal questions without attorney review may constitute UPL, with the deploying lawyer — not the vendor — held accountable. Over 35 state bars have now issued similar AI guidance under the ABA Formal Opinion 512 framework.

What does ABA Formal Opinion 512 require from attorneys who use AI intake tools?

Op. 512 requires attorneys to understand how their AI tools work, supervise their outputs, and ensure they do not violate professional conduct rules. For intake tools specifically, this means knowing whether the AI is capturing information or making legal determinations — and ensuring attorney review happens before any legal information reaches the prospective client.

What questions should I ask an AI intake vendor before deploying?

Ask: (1) Does your AI give legal assessments or only capture intake information? (2) At what point does an attorney review the interaction? (3) How is caller data stored and does it train your model? (4) What happens if the AI makes a statement that constitutes legal advice? Vendors who cannot answer these questions clearly are vendors you should not deploy.

How is Presently compliant with attorney ethics rules on AI intake?

Presently captures structured intake information and delivers it to the supervising attorney before any consultation is scheduled. It does not evaluate claims, advise callers on their legal options, or make legal determinations. The attorney reviews every intake summary. This architecture aligns with ABA Formal Opinion 512 and state bar AI guidance in Alabama, California, Texas, Florida, New York, and Illinois.

Sources

ABA Formal Opinion 512 — Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools
Alabama State Bar — AI Guidance on Chatbots and Legal Intake (July 2026)
ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct — Rules 1.1, 5.3
35+ State Bar AI Guidance Opinions — issued under the Op. 512 framework

Hear exactly what Presently says to your clients.

Call the live demo line right now. You will have an intake summary in under 60 seconds. No legal assessments. No UPL risk. Your governance, intact.

Call (518) 722-2552

Live demo · Available now · No sales call required

presently.legal · Presently vs. Clio Voice AI · Compliance