How a Segmented Hispanic Attorney List Booked 31 Meetings in 3 Months for a Bilingual PPC Agency

Client Overview

Our Client runs a bilingual PPC marketing agency in the US. They build and manage paid campaigns on Google, Meta, TikTok, and Bing for law firms. Most of their clients serve Spanish and English-speaking audiences across personal injury, immigration, and criminal defense.

They came to us with a clear ask. They wanted a list of Hispanic attorneys in those three practice areas, and they wanted us to run the email marketing campaign. 3 months, 6 campaigns: 2 for brand awareness, 4 for lead generation, including follow-ups.

The Challenge

The ask sounded simple. Hispanic-serving attorneys in three specific practice areas across the US isn’t something you pull off a generic attorney list. The audience is narrow, and if the list is even slightly off, the whole campaign misses.

6 sends in 3 months to the same base is a lot. If the early sends bounced hard, the follow-ups would sit in spam, and everything after that would be wasted budget.

The client wanted to stay focused on their existing PPC clients, which meant we owned everything from data to execution to reporting.

And the follow-ups had to earn their place. 2 follow-ups per contact only work if each one has something new to say to the person reading it.

The Solution

We started with the data. We built a 5,012-record list of US attorneys serving Hispanic clients across personal injury, criminal defense, and immigration. Each record included a working business email, direct phone, firm name, practice area, and location.

Then we made a suggestion they hadn’t asked for.

The original plan was one campaign, one message, sent to all 5,012 records. We pushed back. A personal injury attorney’s day looks nothing like a criminal defense attorney’s day, and neither of those looks like an immigration attorney’s day. If we sent the same email to all three, we’d win the middle of the audience and lose the edges.

The data made the segmentation obvious. Three practice areas with fundamentally different business pressures meant three different conversations, and three different reasons to open an email.

So we proposed splitting the list into three groups and writing a different template for each, built around what actually keeps that kind of attorney up at night:

• Personal Injury (2,601 contacts): intake volume and case value.
• Criminal Defense (1,895 contacts): caseload and referral flow.
• Immigration (516 contacts): Spanish-speaking client acquisition.

The client agreed. We wrote the three templates, plus 2 follow-ups per segment that kept building on the same pain point instead of restarting the conversation. Then we ran the full sequence: 2 brand-awareness sends to the whole list first, then 4 lead-generation sends segmented by practice area.

Because we verified the list before it went out, bounces stayed low across all 6 campaigns, and sender reputation held up through the full 3 months.

The Results

3 months, 6 campaigns, 5,012 records. Here’s what came back:

• 24.8% open rate. Practice-area subject lines did most of the work. Attorneys opened because the subject sounded like someone who understood their practice, not a generic pitch.
• 49 positive replies from attorneys who wanted a real conversation about PPC.
• 31 meetings booked, coming in from all three segments and not just the biggest one.
• 0.8% bounce rate across all 6 campaigns. Sender reputation stayed clean through the full 3-month sequence because the list was verified before the first send.

Conclusion

The client came in for data and campaign execution. What they got back was a lesson they didn’t ask for: the list and the message are the same decision. You can’t write one good email to a personal injury attorney and a criminal defense attorney and expect both to open it. Three segments, three conversations, 49 attorneys who replied with genuine interest, 31 who booked a call, 8 who asked to pick it up next quarter.

The client is running a second campaign into the same base now. Different angle: referral networks rather than new client acquisition. Same attorneys. They already know the name.