Arizona Rules of Professional Conduct

Model Rules of Professional Conduct: Table of Contents
http://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduc
t/model_rules_of_professional_conduct_table_of_contents.html
MODEL RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

Nothing contained in this book is to be considered as the rendering of legal advice for specific
cases, and readers are responsible for obtaining such advice from their own legal counsel.
! Russian Translation (2009)

! Other Model Rules Resources
• ©2013 by the American Bar Association. All rights reserved.
Table of Contents
! Subject Matter Index

! Preface
! Commission on Evaluation of Professional Standards Chair's Introduction
! Commission on Evaluation of the Rules of Professional Conduct ("Ethics 2000") Chair's
Introduction
! Preamble and Scope
Rules
Rule 1.0 Terminology
Client-Lawyer Relationship
Rule 1.1 Competence
Rule 1.2 Scope of Representation and Allocation of Authority Between Client and Lawyer
Rule 1.3 Diligence
Rule 1.4 Communications
Rule 1.5 Fees
Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information
Rule 1.7 Conflict of Interest: Current Clients
Rule 1.8 Conflict of Interest: Current Clients: Specific Rules
Rule 1.9 Duties to Former Clients
Rule 1.10 Imputation of Conflicts of Interest: General Rule
Rule 1.11 Special Conflicts of Interest for Former and Current Government Officers and Employees
Rule 1.12 Former Judge, Arbitrator, Mediator or Other Third-Party Neutral
Rule 1.13 Organization as Client
Rule 1.14 Client with Diminished Capacity
Rule 1.15 Safekeeping Property
Rule 1.16 Declining or Terminating Representation
Rule 1.17 Sale of Law Practice
Rule 1.18 Duties to Prospective Client
Counselor
Rule 2.1 Advisor
Rule 2.2 (Deleted)
Rule 2.3 Evaluation for Use by Third Persons
Rule 2.4 Lawyer Serving as Third-Party Neutral
9 9
Advocate
Rule 3.1 Meritorious Claims and Contentions
Rule 3.2 Expediting Litigation
Rule 3.3 Candor toward the Tribunal
Rule 3.4 Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel
Rule 3.5 Impartiality and Decorum of the Tribunal
Rule 3.6 Trial Publicity
Rule 3.7 Lawyer as Witness
Rule 3.8 Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor
Rule 3.9 Advocate in Nonadjudicative Proceedings
Transactions with Persons Other Than Clients

Rule 4.1 Truthfulness in Statements to Others
Rule 4.2 Communication with Person Represented by Counsel
Rule 4.3 Dealing with Unrepresented Person
Rule 4.4 Respect for Rights of Third Persons
Law Firms and Associations

Rule 5.1 Responsibilities of a Partner or Supervisory Lawyer
Rule 5.2 Responsibilities of a Subordinate Lawyer
Rule 5.3 Responsibilities Regarding Nonlawyer Assistance
Rule 5.4 Professional Independence of a Lawyer
Rule 5.5 Unauthorized Practice of Law; Multijurisdictional Practiceof Law
Rule 5.6 Restrictions on Rights to Practice
Rule 5.7 Responsibilities Regarding Law-related Services
Public Service
Rule 6.1 Voluntary Pro Bono Publico Service
Rule 6.2 Accepting Appointments
Rule 6.3 Membership in Legal Services Organization
Rule 6.4 Law Reform Activities Affecting Client Interests
Rule 6.5 Nonprofit and Court Annexed Limited Legal Services Programs
Information About Legal Services

Rule 7.1 Communication Concerning a Lawyer's Services
Rule 7.2 Advertising
Rule 7.3 Solicitation of Clients
Rule 7.4 Communication of Fields of Practice and Specialization
Rule 7.5 Firm Names and Letterhead
Rule 7.6 Political Contributions to Obtain Legal Engagements or Appointments by Judges
Maintaining the Integrity of the Profession

Rule 8.1 Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters
Rule 8.2 Judicial and Legal Officials
Rule 8.3 Reporting Professional Misconduct
Rule 8.4 Misconduct
Rule 8.5 Disciplinary Authority; Choice of Law
9 9
Rule 7.1: Communication Concerning a Lawyer's
Services
Rule 7.1 Communications Concerning A Lawyer's Services
A lawyer shall not make a false or misleading communication about the lawyer or the lawyer's
services. A communication is false or misleading if it contains a material misrepresentation of fact
or law, or omits a fact necessary to make the statement considered as a whole not materially
misleading.
9
9
Rule 7.2: Advertising
Rule 7.2 Advertising
(a) Subject to the requirements of Rules 7.1 and 7.3, a lawyer may advertise services through
written, recorded or electronic communication, including public media.
(b) A lawyer shall not give anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer's services
except that a lawyer may
(1) pay the reasonable costs of advertisements or communications permitted by this Rule;
(2) pay the usual charges of a legal service plan or a not-for-profit or qualified lawyer referral
service. A qualified lawyer referral service is a lawyer referral service that has been approved by
an appropriate regulatory authority;
(3) pay for a law practice in accordance with Rule 1.17; and
(4) refer clients to another lawyer or a nonlawyer professional pursuant to an agreement not
otherwise prohibited under these Rules that provides for the other person to refer clients or
customers to the lawyer, if
(i) the reciprocal referral agreement is not exclusive, and
(ii) the client is informed of the existence and nature of the agreement.
(c) Any communication made pursuant to this rule shall include the name and office address of at
least one lawyer or law firm responsible for its content.
9
9 9
99
Rule 7.3: Direct Contact with Prospective Clients
Rule 7.3 Solicitation of Clients
(a) A lawyer shall not by in-person, live telephone or real-time electronic contact solicit
professional employment when a significant motive for the lawyer's doing so is the lawyer's
pecuniary gain, unless the person contacted:
(1) is a lawyer; or
(2) has a family, close personal, or prior professional relationship with the lawyer.
(b) A lawyer shall not solicit professional employment by written, recorded or electronic
communication or by in-person, telephone or real-time electronic contact even when not otherwise
prohibited by paragraph (a), if:
(1) the target of the solicitation has made known to the lawyer a desire not to be solicited by the
lawyer; or
(2) the solicitation involves coercion, duress or harassment.
(c) Every written, recorded or electronic communication from a lawyer soliciting professional
employment from anyone known to be in need of legal services in a particular matter shall include
the words "Advertising Material" on the outside envelope, if any, and at the beginning and ending
of any recorded or electronic communication, unless the recipient of the communication is a
person specified in paragraphs (a)(1) or (a)(2).
(d) Notwithstanding the prohibitions in paragraph (a), a lawyer may participate with a prepaid or
group legal service plan operated by an organization not owned or directed by the lawyer that
uses in-person or telephone contact to solicit memberships or subscriptions for the plan from
persons who are not known to need legal services in a particular matter covered by the plan.
9
9
Rule 7.4: Communication of Fields of Practice &
Specialization
Rule 7.4 Communication of Fields of Practice and Specialization
(a) A lawyer may communicate the fact that the lawyer does or does not practice in particular
fields of law.
(b) A lawyer admitted to engage in patent practice before the United States Patent and Trademark
Office may use the designation "Patent Attorney" or a substantially similar designation.
(c) A lawyer engaged in Admiralty practice may use the designation "Admiralty," "Proctor in
Admiralty" or a substantially similar designation.
(d) A lawyer shall not state or imply that a lawyer is certified as a specialist in a particular field of
law, unless:
(1) the lawyer has been certified as a specialist by an organization that has been approved by an
appropriate state authority or that has been accredited by the American Bar Association; and
(2) the name of the certifying organization is clearly identified in the communication.
9
9
Rule 7.5: Firm Names & Letterhead
Rule 7.5 Firm Names And Letterheads
(a) A lawyer shall not use a firm name, letterhead or other professional designation that violates
Rule 7.1. A trade name may be used by a lawyer in private practice if it does not imply a
connection with a government agency or with a public or charitable legal services organization and
is not otherwise in violation of Rule 7.1.
(b) A law firm with offices in more than one jurisdiction may use the same name or other
professional designation in each jurisdiction, but identification of the lawyers in an office of the
firm shall indicate the jurisdictional limitations on those not licensed to practice in the jurisdiction
where the office is located.
(c) The name of a lawyer holding a public office shall not be used in the name of a law firm, or in
communications on its behalf, during any substantial period in which the lawyer is not actively and
regularly practicing with the firm.
(d) Lawyers may state or imply that they practice in a partnership or other organization only when
that is the fact.
9
9
Rule 7.6: Political Contributions to Obtain Legal
Engagements or Appointments by Judges
Rule 7.6 Political Contributions To Obtain Legal Engagements Or
Appointments By Judges
A lawyer or law firm shall not accept a government legal engagement or an appointment by a
judge if the lawyer or law firm makes a political contribution or solicits political contributions for
the purpose of obtaining or being considered for that type of legal engagement or appointment.
9 9
State Adoption of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct
(previously the Model Code of Professional Responsibility)
Dates of initial adoption

Alphabetical Order
Jurisdiction Date of Adoption
Alabama 5/2/90
Alaska 4/14/93
Arizona 9/7/84
Arkansas 12/16/85
Colorado 5/7/92
Connecticut 6/23/86
Delaware 9/12/85
District of Columbia 3/1/90
Florida 7/17/86
Georgia 6/12/00
Hawaii 12/6/93
Idaho 9/3/86
Illinois 2/8/90
Indiana 11/25/86
Iowa 4/20/05
Kansas 1/29/88
Kentucky 6/12/89
Louisiana 12/18/86
Maine 2/26/09
Maryland 4/15/86
Massachusetts 6/9/97
Michigan 3/11/88
Minnesota 6/13/85
Mississippi 2/18/87
Missouri 8/7/85
Montana 6/6/85
Nebraska 6/8/05
Nevada 1/26/86
New Hampshire 1/16/86
New Jersey 7/12/84
New Mexico 6/26/86
New York 12/16/08
North Carolina 10/7/85
North Dakota 5/6/87
Ohio 8/1/06
Oklahoma 3/10/88
Oregon 1/1/05
Pennsylvania 10/16/87
Rhode Island 11/1/88
South Carolina 1/9/90
South Dakota 12/15/87
Tennessee 8/27/02
Texas 6/20/89
Utah 3/20/87
Vermont 3/9/99
Virgin Islands 1/28/91
Virginia 1/25/99
Washington 7/25/85
West Virginia 6/30/88
Wisconsin 6/10/87
Wyoming 11/7/86
9
M.R. 3140
IN THE
SUPREME COURT
OF
THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Order entered July 1, 2009.
Effective January 1, 2010, the provisions of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct will be
repealed and replaced by the following Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct of 2010.
ARTICLE VIII. ILLINOIS RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

OF 2010
RULE 7.1:
COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING A LAWYER’S SERVICES
A lawyer shall not make a false or misleading communication about the lawyer or the
lawyer’s services. A communication is false or misleading if it contains a material
misrepresentation of fact or law, or omits a fact necessary to make the statement considered as
a whole not materially misleading.
Adopted July 1, 2009, effective January 1, 2010.

Comment
[1] This Rule governs all communications about a lawyer’s services, including advertising
permitted by Rule 7.2. Whatever means are used to make known a lawyer’s services,
statements about them must be truthful.
[2] Truthful statements that are misleading are also prohibited by this Rule. A truthful
statement is misleading if it omits a fact necessary to make the lawyer’s communication
considered as a whole not materially misleading. A truthful statement is also misleading if
there is a substantial likelihood that it will lead a reasonable person to formulate a specific
conclusion about the lawyer or the lawyer’s services for which there is no reasonable factual
foundation.
[3] An advertisement that truthfully reports a lawyer’s achievements on behalf of clients or
former clients may be misleading if presented so as to lead a reasonable person to form an
unjustified expectation that the same results could be obtained for other clients in similar
matters without reference to the specific factual and legal circumstances of each client’s case.
Similarly, an unsubstantiated comparison of the lawyer’s services or fees with the services or
fees of other lawyers may be misleading if presented with such specificity as would lead a
reasonable person to conclude that the comparison can be substantiated. The inclusion of an
appropriate disclaimer or qualifying language may preclude a finding that a statement is likely
to create unjustified expectations or otherwise mislead a prospective client.
[4] See also Rule 8.4(e) for the prohibition against stating or implying an ability to
influence improperly a government agency or official or to achieve results by means that
violate the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law.

RULE 7.2: ADVERTISING
(a) Subject to the requirements of Rules 7.1 and 7.3, a lawyer may advertise services
through written, recorded or electronic communication, including public media.
(b) A lawyer shall not give anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer’s
services except that a lawyer may
(1) pay the reasonable costs of advertisements or communications permitted by this Rule;
(2) pay the usual charges of a legal service plan or a not-for-profit lawyer referral service;
(3) pay for a law practice in accordance with Rule 1.17; and
(4) refer clients to another lawyer or a nonlawyer professional pursuant to an agreement not
otherwise prohibited under these Rules that provides for the other person to refer clients or
customers to the lawyer, if
(i) the reciprocal referral agreement is not exclusive, and
(ii) the client is informed of the existence and nature of the agreement.
(c) Any communication made pursuant to this Rule shall include the name and office
address of at least one lawyer or law firm responsible for its content.

Comment
[1] To assist the public in obtaining legal services, lawyers should be allowed to make
known their services not only through reputation but also through organized information
campaigns in the form of advertising. Advertising involves an active quest for clients, contrary
to the tradition that a lawyer should not seek clientele. However, the public’s need to know
about legal services can be fulfilled in part through advertising. This need is particularly acute
in the case of persons of moderate means who have not made extensive use of legal services.
The interest in expanding public information about legal services ought to prevail over
considerations of tradition. Nevertheless, advertising by lawyers entails the risk of practices
that are misleading or overreaching.
[2] This Rule permits public dissemination of information concerning a lawyer’s name or
firm name, address and telephone number; the kinds of services the lawyer will undertake; the
basis on which the lawyer’s fees are determined, including prices for specific services and
payment and credit arrangements; a lawyer’s foreign language ability; names of references and,
with their consent, names of clients regularly represented; and other information that might
invite the attention of those seeking legal assistance.
[3] Questions of effectiveness and taste in advertising are matters of speculation and
subjective judgment. Some jurisdictions have had extensive prohibitions against television
advertising, against advertising going beyond specified facts about a lawyer, or against
“undignified” advertising. Television is now one of the most powerful media for getting
information to the public, particularly persons of low and moderate income; prohibiting
television advertising, therefore, would impede the flow of information about legal services to
many sectors of the public. Limiting the information that may be advertised has a similar effect
and assumes that the bar can accurately forecast the kind of information that the public would
regard as relevant. Similarly, electronic media, such as the Internet, can be an important source
of information about legal services, and lawful communication by electronic mail is permitted
by this Rule. But see Rule 7.3(a) for the prohibition against the solicitation of a prospective
client through a real-time electronic exchange that is not initiated by the prospective client.
[4] Neither this Rule nor Rule 7.3 prohibits communications authorized by law, such as
notice to members of a class in class action litigation.
Paying Others to Recommend a Lawyer
[5] Lawyers are not permitted to pay others for channeling professional work. Paragraph
(b)(1), however, allows a lawyer to pay for advertising and communications permitted by this
Rule, including the costs of print directory listings, on-line directory listings, newspaper ads,
television and radio airtime, domain-name registrations, sponsorship fees, banner ads, and
group advertising. A lawyer may compensate employees, agents and vendors who are engaged
to provide marketing or client-development services, such as publicists, public-relations
personnel, business-development staff and website designers. See Rule 5.3 for the duties of
lawyers and law firms with respect to the conduct of nonlawyers who prepare marketing
materials for them.
[6] A lawyer may pay the usual charges of a legal service plan or a not-for-profit lawyer
referral service. A legal service plan is a prepaid or group legal service plan or a similar
delivery system that assists prospective clients to secure legal representation. A lawyer referral
service, on the other hand, is any organization that holds itself out to the public as a lawyer
referral service. Such referral services are understood by laypersons to be consumer-oriented
organizations that provide unbiased referrals to lawyers with appropriate experience in the
subject matter of the representation and afford other client protections, such as complaint
procedures or malpractice insurance requirements. Consequently, this Rule only permits a
lawyer to pay the usual charges of a not-for-profit lawyer referral service.
[7] A lawyer who accepts assignments or referrals from a legal service plan or referrals
from a lawyer referral service must act reasonably to assure that the activities of the plan or
service are compatible with the lawyer’s professional obligations. See Rule 5.3. Legal service
plans and lawyer referral services may communicate with prospective clients, but such
communication must be in conformity with these Rules. Thus, advertising must not be false or
misleading, as would be the case if the communications of a group advertising program or a
group legal services plan would mislead prospective clients to think that it was a lawyer
referral service sponsored by a state agency or bar association. Nor could the lawyer allow in-
person, telephonic, or real-time contacts that would violate Rule 7.3.
[8] A lawyer also may agree to refer clients to another lawyer or a nonlawyer professional,
in return for the undertaking of that person to refer clients or customers to the lawyer. Such
reciprocal referral arrangements must not interfere with the lawyer’s professional judgment as
to making referrals or as to providing substantive legal services. See Rules 2.1 and 5.4(c).
Except as provided in Rule 1.5(e), a lawyer who receives referrals from a lawyer or nonlawyer
professional must not pay anything solely for the referral, but the lawyer does not violate
paragraph (b) of this Rule by agreeing to refer clients to the other lawyer or nonlawyer
professional, so long as the reciprocal referral agreement is not exclusive and the client is
informed of the referral agreement. Conflicts of interest created by such arrangements are
governed by Rule 1.7. Reciprocal referral agreements should not be of indefinite duration and
should be reviewed periodically to determine whether they comply with these Rules. This Rule
does not restrict referrals or divisions of revenues or net income among lawyers within firms
comprised of multiple entities.

RULE 7.3:
DIRECT CONTACT WITH PROSPECTIVE CLIENTS
(a) A lawyer shall not by in-person, live telephone or real-time electronic contact solicit
professional employment from a prospective client when a significant motive for the lawyer’s
doing so is the lawyer’s pecuniary gain, unless the person contacted:
(1) is a lawyer; or
(2) has a family, close personal, or prior professional relationship with the lawyer.
(b) A lawyer shall not solicit professional employment from a prospective client by written,
recorded or electronic communication or by in-person, telephone or real-time electronic
contact even when not otherwise prohibited by paragraph (a), if:
(1) the prospective client has made known to the lawyer a desire not to be solicited by the
lawyer; or
(2) the solicitation involves coercion, duress or harassment.
(c) Every written, recorded or electronic communication from a lawyer soliciting
professional employment from a prospective client known to be in need of legal services in a
particular matter shall include the words “Advertising Material” on the outside envelope, if
any, and at the beginning and ending of any recorded or electronic communication, unless the
recipient of the communication is a person specified in paragraphs (a)(1) or (a)(2).
(d) Notwithstanding the prohibitions in paragraph (a), a lawyer may participate with a
prepaid or group legal service plan operated by an organization not owned or directed by the
lawyer that uses in-person or telephone contact to solicit memberships or subscriptions for the
plan from persons who are not known to need legal services in a particular matter covered by
the plan.

Comment
[1] There is a potential for abuse inherent in direct in-person, live telephone or real-time
electronic contact by a lawyer with a prospective client known to need legal services. These
forms of contact between a lawyer and a prospective client subject the layperson to the private
importuning of the trained advocate in a direct interpersonal encounter. The prospective client,
who may already feel overwhelmed by the circumstances giving rise to the need for legal
services, may find it difficult fully to evaluate all available alternatives with reasoned judgment
and appropriate self-interest in the face of the lawyer’s presence and insistence upon being
retained immediately. The situation is fraught with the possibility of undue influence,
intimidation, and overreaching.
[2] This potential for abuse inherent in direct in-person, live telephone or real-time
electronic solicitation of prospective clients justifies its prohibition, particularly since lawyer
advertising and written and recorded communication permitted under Rule 7.2 offer alternative
means of conveying necessary information to those who may be in need of legal services.
Advertising and written and recorded communications which may be mailed or autodialed
make it possible for a prospective client to be informed about the need for legal services, and
about the qualifications of available lawyers and law firms, without subjecting the prospective
client to direct in-person, telephone or real-time electronic persuasion that may overwhelm the
client’s judgment.
[3] The use of general advertising and written, recorded or electronic communications to
transmit information from lawyer to prospective client, rather than direct in-person, live
telephone or real-time electronic contact, will help to assure that the information flows cleanly
as well as freely. The contents of advertisements and communications permitted under Rule 7.2
can be permanently recorded so that they cannot be disputed and may be shared with others
who know the lawyer. This potential for informal review is itself likely to help guard against
statements and claims that might constitute false and misleading communications, in violation
of Rule 7.1. The contents of direct in-person, live telephone or real-time electronic
conversations between a lawyer and a prospective client can be disputed and may not be
subject to third-party scrutiny. Consequently, they are much more likely to approach (and
occasionally cross) the dividing line between accurate representations and those that are false
and misleading.
[4] There is far less likelihood that a lawyer would engage in abusive practices
against an individual who is a former client, or with whom the lawyer has close personal
or family relationship, or in situations in which the lawyer is motivated by considerations
other than the lawyer’s pecuniary gain. Nor is there a serious potential for abuse when the
person contacted is a lawyer. Consequently, the general prohibition in Rule 7.3(a) and the
requirements of Rule 7.3(c) are not applicable in those situations. Also, paragraph (a) is
not intended to prohibit a lawyer from participating in constitutionally protected activities
of public or charitable legal- service organizations or bona fide political, social, civic,
fraternal, employee or trade organizations whose purposes include providing or
recommending legal services to its members or beneficiaries.
[5] But even permitted forms of solicitation can be abused. Thus, any solicitation which
contains information which is false or misleading within the meaning of Rule 7.1, which
involves coercion, duress or harassment within the meaning of Rule 7.3(b)(2), or which
involves contact with a prospective client who has made known to the lawyer a desire not to be
solicited by the lawyer within the meaning of Rule 7.3(b)(1) is prohibited. Moreover, if after
sending a letter or other communication to a client as permitted by Rule 7.2 the lawyer receives
no response, any further effort to communicate with the prospective client may violate the
provisions of Rule 7.3(b).
[6] This Rule is not intended to prohibit a lawyer from contacting representatives of
organizations or groups that may be interested in establishing a group or prepaid legal plan for
their members, insureds, beneficiaries or other third parties for the purpose of informing such
entities of the availability of and details concerning the plan or arrangement which the lawyer
or lawyer’s firm is willing to offer. This form of communication is not directed to a prospective
client. Rather, it is usually addressed to an individual acting in a fiduciary capacity seeking a
supplier of legal services for others who may, if they choose, become prospective clients of the
lawyer. Under these circumstances, the activity which the lawyer undertakes in communicating
with such representatives and the type of information transmitted to the individual are
functionally similar to and serve the same purpose as advertising permitted under Rule 7.2.
[7] The requirement in Rule 7.3(c) that certain communications be marked “Advertising
Material” does not apply to communications sent in response to requests of potential clients or
their spokespersons or sponsors. General announcements by lawyers, including changes in
personnel or office location, do not constitute communications soliciting professional
employment from a client known to be in need of legal services within the meaning of this
Rule.
[8] Paragraph (d) of this Rule permits a lawyer to participate with an organization which
uses personal contact to solicit members for its group or prepaid legal service plan, provided
that the personal contact is not undertaken by any lawyer who would be a provider of legal
services through the plan. The organization must not be owned by or directed (whether as
manager or otherwise) by any lawyer or law firm that participates in the plan. For example,
paragraph (d) would not permit a lawyer to create an organization controlled directly or
indirectly by the lawyer and use the organization for the in-person or telephone solicitation of
legal employment of the lawyer through memberships in the plan or otherwise. The
communication permitted by these organizations also must not be directed to a person known
to need legal services in a particular matter, but is to be designed to inform potential plan
members generally of another means of affordable legal services. Lawyers who participate in a
legal service plan must reasonably assure that the plan sponsors are in compliance with Rules
7.1, 7.2 and 7.3(b). See Rule 8.4(a).

RULE 7.4: COMMUNICATION OF FIELDS OF PRACTICE
AND SPECIALIZATION
(a) A lawyer may communicate the fact that the lawyer does or does not practice in
particular fields of law.
(b) The Supreme Court of Illinois does not recognize certifications of specialties in the
practice of law, nor does it recognize certifications of expertise in any phase of the practice of
law by any agency, governmental or private, or by any group, organization or association. A
lawyer admitted to engage in patent practice before the United States Patent and Trademark
Office may use the designation “Patent Attorney” or a substantially similar designation.
(c) Except when identifying certificates, awards or recognitions issued to him or her by an
agency or organization, a lawyer may not use the terms “certified,’’ “specialist,’’ “expert,’’ or
any other, similar terms to describe his qualifications as a lawyer or his qualifications in any
subspecialty of the law. If such terms are used to identify any certificates, awards or
recognitions issued by any agency, governmental or private, or by any group, organization or
association, the reference must meet the following requirements:
(1) the reference must be truthful and verifiable and may not be misleading in violation of
Rule 7.1;
(2) the reference must state that the Supreme Court of Illinois does not recognize
certifications of specialties in the practice of law and that the certificate, award or
recognition is not a requirement to practice law in Illinois.
Comment
[1] Paragraph (a) of this Rule permits a lawyer to indicate areas of practice in
communications about the lawyer’s services. If a lawyer practices only in certain fields, or will
not accept matters except in a specified field or fields, the lawyer is permitted to so indicate.
[2] Paragraph (b) states the general policy of the Supreme Court of Illinois not to recognize
certifications of specialties or expertise, except that it recognizes that admission to patent
practice before the Patent and Trademark Office confers a long-established and well-
recognized status. The omission of reference to lawyers engaged in trademark or admiralty
practice that were contained in the prior rule is not intended to suggest that such lawyers may
not use terms such as “Trademark Lawyer” or “Admiralty” to indicate areas of practice as
permitted by paragraph (a).
[3] Paragraph (c) permits a lawyer to state that the lawyer is certified, is a specialist in a
field of law, or is an “expert” or any other similar term, only if certain requirements are met.

RULE 7.5:
FIRM NAMES AND LETTERHEADS
(a) A lawyer shall not use a firm name, letterhead or other professional designation that
violates Rule 7.1. A trade name may be used by a lawyer in private practice if it does not imply
a connection with a government agency or with a public or charitable legal services
organization and is not otherwise in violation of Rule 7.1.
(b) A law firm with offices in more than one jurisdiction may use the same name or other
professional designation in each jurisdiction, but identification of the lawyers in an office of
the firm shall indicate the jurisdictional limitations on those not licensed to practice in the
jurisdiction where the office is located.
(c) The name of a lawyer holding a public office shall not be used in the name of a law
firm, or in communications on its behalf, during any substantial period in which the lawyer is
not actively and regularly practicing with the firm.
(d) Lawyers may state or imply that they practice in a partnership or other organization
only when that is the fact.
Comment
[1] A firm may be designated by the names of all or some of its members, by the names of
deceased members where there has been a continuing succession in the firm’s identity or by a
trade name such as the “ABC Legal Clinic.” A lawyer or law firm may also be designated by a
distinctive website address or comparable professional designation. Although the United States
Supreme Court has held that legislation may prohibit the use of trade names in professional
practice, use of such names in law practice is acceptable so long as it is not misleading. If a
private firm uses a trade name that includes a geographical name such as “Springfield Legal
Clinic,” an express disclaimer that it is a public legal aid agency may be required to avoid a
misleading implication. It may be observed that any firm name including the name of a
deceased partner is, strictly speaking, a trade name. The use of such names to designate law
firms has proven a useful means of identification. However, it is misleading to use the name of
a lawyer not associated with the firm or a predecessor of the firm, or the name of a nonlawyer.
[2] With regard to paragraph (d), lawyers sharing office facilities, but who are not in fact
associated with each other in a law firm, may not denominate themselves as, for example,
“Smith and Jones,” for that title suggests that they are practicing law together in a firm.
RULE 7.6: RESERVED

New York Rules of Professional Responsibility
RULE 7.1:
Advertising
(a) A lawyer or law firm shall not use or disseminate or participate in the use or dissemination of
any advertisement that:
(1) contains statements or claims that are false, deceptive or misleading; or
(2) violates a Rule.
(b) Subject to the provisions of paragraph (a), an advertisement may include information as to:
(1) legal and nonlegal education, degrees and other scholastic distinctions, dates of
admission to any bar; areas of the law in which the lawyer or law firm practices, as
authorized by these Rules; public offices and teaching positions held; publications of law
related matters authored by the lawyer; memberships in bar associations or other
professional societies or organizations, including offices and committee assignments
therein; foreign language fluency; and bona fide professional ratings;
(2) names of clients regularly represented, provided that the client has given prior written
consent;
(3) bank references; credit arrangements accepted; prepaid or group legal services
programs in which the lawyer or law firm participates; nonlegal services provided by the
lawyer or law firm or by an entity owned and controlled by the lawyer or law firm; the
existence of contractual relationships between the lawyer or law firm and a nonlegal
professional or nonlegal professional service firm, to the extent permitted by Rule 5.8,
and the nature and extent of services available through those contractual relationships;
and
(4) legal fees for initial consultation; contingent fee rates in civil matters when
accompanied by a statement disclosing the information required by paragraph (p); range
of fees for legal and nonlegal services, provided that there be available to the public free
of charge a written statement clearly describing the scope of each advertised service;
hourly rates; and fixed fees for specified legal and nonlegal services.
(c) An advertisement shall not:
(1) include an endorsement of, or testimonial about, a lawyer or law firm from a client
with respect to a matter still pending;
(2) include a paid endorsement of, or testimonial about, a lawyer or law firm without
disclosing that the person is being compensated therefor;
(3) include the portrayal of a judge, the portrayal of a fictitious law firm, the use of a
fictitious name to refer to lawyers not associated together in a law firm, or otherwise
imply that lawyers are associated in a law firm if that is not the case;
(4) use actors to portray the lawyer, members of the law firm, or clients, or utilize
depictions of fictionalized events or scenes, without disclosure of same;
(5) rely on techniques to obtain attention that demonstrate a clear and intentional lack of
relevance to the selection of counsel, including the portrayal of lawyers exhibiting
characteristics clearly unrelated to legal competence;
(6) be made to resemble legal documents; or
(7) utilize a nickname, moniker, motto or trade name that implies an ability to obtain
results in a matter.
(d) An advertisement that complies with paragraph (e) may contain the following:
(1) statements that are reasonably likely to create an expectation about results the lawyer
can achieve;
(2) statements that compare the lawyer’s services with the services of other lawyers;
(3) testimonials or endorsements of clients, where not prohibited by paragraph (c) (1),
and of former clients; or
(4) statements describing or characterizing the quality of the lawyer’s or law firm’s
services.
(e) It is permissible to provide the information set forth in paragraph (d) provided:
(1) its dissemination does not violate paragraph (a);
(2) it can be factually supported by the lawyer or law firm as of the date on which the
advertisement is published or disseminated; and
(3) it is accompanied by the following disclaimer: “Prior results do not guarantee a

similar outcome.”
(f ) Every advertisement other than those appearing in a radio, television or billboard

advertisement, in a directory, newspaper, magazine or other periodical (and any web sites related
thereto), or made in person pursuant to Rule 7.3 (a) (1), shall be labeled “Attorney Advertising”
on the first page, or on the home page in the case of a web site. If the communication is in the
form of a self-mailing brochure or postcard, the words “Attorney Advertising” shall appear
therein. In the case of electronic mail, the subject line shall contain the notation “ATTORNEY
ADVERTISING.”
(g) A lawyer or law firm shall not utilize:
(1) a pop-up or pop-under advertisement in connection with computer-accessed

communications, other than on the lawyer or law firm’s own web site or other internet
presence; or
(2) meta tags or other hidden computer codes that, if displayed, would violate these
Rules.
(h) All advertisements shall include the name, principal law office address and telephone number
of the lawyer or law firm whose services are being offered.
(i) Any words or statements required by this Rule to appear in an advertisement must be clearly
legible and capable of being read by the average person, if written, and intelligible if spoken
aloud. In the case of a web site, the required words or statements shall appear on the home page.
(j) A lawyer or law firm advertising any fixed fee for specified legal services shall, at the time of
fee publication, have available to the public a written statement clearly describing the scope of
each advertised service, which statement shall be available to the client at the time of retainer for
any such service. Such legal services shall include all those services that are recognized as
reasonable and necessary under local custom in the area of practice in the community where the
services are performed.
(k) All advertisements shall be pre-approved by the lawyer or law firm, and a copy shall be
retained for a period of not less than three years following its initial dissemination. Any
advertisement contained in a computer-accessed communication shall be retained for a period of
not less than one year. A copy of the contents of any web site covered by this Rule shall be
preserved upon the initial publication of the web site, any major web site redesign, or a
meaningful and extensive content change, but in no event less frequently than once every 90
days.
(l) If a lawyer or law firm advertises a range of fees or an hourly rate for services, the lawyer or
law firm shall not charge more than the fee advertised for such services. If a lawyer or law firm
advertises a fixed fee for specified legal services, or performs services described in a fee
schedule, the lawyer or law firm shall not charge more than the fixed fee for such stated legal
service as set forth in the advertisement or fee schedule, unless the client agrees in writing that the
services performed or to be performed were not legal services referred to or implied in the
advertisement or in the fee schedule and, further, that a different fee arrangement shall apply to
the transaction.
(m)Unless otherwise specified in the advertisement, if a lawyer publishes any fee information
authorized under this Rule in a publication that is published more frequently than once per month,
the lawyer shall be bound by any representation made therein for a period of not less than 30 days
after such publication. If a lawyer publishes any fee information authorized under this Rule in a
publication that is published once per month or less frequently, the lawyer shall be bound by any
representation made therein until the publication of the succeeding issue. If a lawyer publishes
any fee information authorized under this Rule in a publication that has no fixed date for
publication of a succeeding issue, the lawyer shall be bound by any representation made therein
for a reasonable period of time after publication, but in no event less than 90 days.
(n) Unless otherwise specified, if a lawyer broadcasts any fee information authorized under this
Rule, the lawyer shall be bound by any representation made therein for a period of not less than
30 days after such broadcast.
(o) A lawyer shall not compensate or give any thing of value to representatives of the press, radio,
television or other communication medium in anticipation of or in return for professional
publicity in a news item.
(p) All advertisements that contain information about the fees charged by the lawyer or law firm,
including those indicating that in the absence of a recovery no fee will be charged, shall comply
with the provisions of Judiciary Law §488 (3).
(q) A lawyer may accept employment that results from participation in activities designed to
educate the public to recognize legal problems, to make intelligent selection of counsel or to
utilize available legal services.
(r) Without affecting the right to accept employment, a lawyer may speak publicly or write for
publication on legal topics so long as the lawyer does not undertake to give individual advice.
RULE 7.2: Payment for Referrals
(a) A lawyer shall not compensate or give anything of value to a person or organization to
recommend or obtain employment by a client, or as a reward for having made a recommendation
resulting in employment by a client, except that:
(1) a lawyer or law firm may refer clients to a nonlegal professional or nonlegal
professional service firm pursuant to a contractual relationship with such nonlegal
professional or nonlegal professional service firm to provide legal and other professional
services on a systematic and continuing basis as permitted by Rule 5.8, provided however
that such referral shall not otherwise include any monetary or other tangible consideration
or reward for such, or the sharing of legal fees; and
(2) a lawyer may pay the usual and reasonable fees or dues charged by a qualified legal
assistance organization or referral fees to another lawyer as permitted by Rule 1.5 (g).
(b) A lawyer or the lawyer’s partner or associate or any other affiliated lawyer may be
recommended, employed or paid by, or may cooperate with one of the following offices or
organizations that promote the use of the lawyer’s services or those of a partner or associate or
any other affiliated lawyer, or request one of the following offices or organizations to recommend
or promote the use of the lawyer’s services or those of the lawyer’s partner or associate, or any
other affiliated lawyer as a private practitioner, if there is no interference with the exercise of
independent professional judgment on behalf of the client:
(1) a legal aid office or public defender office:
(i) operated or sponsored by a duly accredited law school;
(ii) operated or sponsored by a bona fide, non-profit community organization;
(iii) operated or sponsored by a governmental agency; or
(iv) operated, sponsored, or approved by a bar association;
(2) a military legal assistance office;
(3) a lawyer referral service operated, sponsored or approved by a bar association or

authorized by law or court rule; or
(4) any bona fide organization that recommends, furnishes or pays for legal services to its
members or beneficiaries provided the following conditions are satisfied:
(i) Neither the lawyer, nor the lawyer’s partner, nor associate, nor any other affiliated
lawyer nor any nonlawyer, shall have initiated or promoted such organization for the
primary purpose of providing financial or other benefit to such lawyer, partner, associate
or affiliated lawyer;
(ii) Such organization is not operated for the purpose of procuring legal work or financial
benefit for any lawyer as a private practitioner outside of the legal services program of
the organization;
(iii) The member or beneficiary to whom the legal services are furnished, and not such
organization, is recognized as the client of the lawyer in the matter;
(iv) The legal service plan of such organization provides appropriate relief for any
member or beneficiary who asserts a claim that representation by counsel furnished,
selected or approved by the organization for the particular matter involved would be
unethical, improper or inadequate under the circumstances of the matter involved; and the
plan provides an appropriate procedure for seeking such relief;
(v) The lawyer does not know or have cause to know that such organization is in
violation of applicable laws, rules of court or other legal requirements that govern its
legal service operations; and
(vi) Such organization has filed with the appropriate disciplinary authority, to the extent
required by such authority, at least annually a report with respect to its legal service plan,
if any, showing its terms, its schedule of benefits, its subscription charges, agreements
with counsel and financial results of its legal service activities or, if it has failed to do so,
the lawyer does not know or have cause to know of such failure.
RULE 7.3: Solicitation and Recommendation of Professional Employment
(a) A lawyer shall not engage in solicitation:
(1) by in-person or telephone contact, or by realtime or interactive computer-accessed

communication unless the recipient is a close friend, relative, former client or existing
client; or
(2) by any form of communication if:
(i) the communication or contact violates Rule 4.5, Rule 7.1 (a), or paragraph (e) of this
Rule;
(ii) the recipient has made known to the lawyer a desire not to be solicited by the lawyer;
(iii) the solicitation involves coercion, duress or harassment;

(iv) the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the age or the physical, emotional
or mental state of the recipient makes it unlikely that the recipient will be able to exercise
reasonable judgment in retaining a lawyer; or
(v) the lawyer intends or expects, but does not disclose, that the legal services necessary
to handle the matter competently will be performed primarily by another lawyer who is
not affiliated with the soliciting lawyer as a partner, associate or of counsel.
(b) For purposes of this Rule, “solicitation” means any advertisement initiated by or on behalf of
a lawyer or law firm that is directed to, or targeted at, a specific recipient or group of recipients,
or their family members or legal representatives, the primary purpose of which is the retention of
the lawyer or law firm, and a significant motive for which is pecuniary gain. It does not include a
proposal or other writing prepared and delivered in response to a specific request of a prospective
client.
(c) A solicitation directed to a recipient in this State shall be subject to the following provisions:
(1) A copy of the solicitation shall at the time of its dissemination be filed with the
attorney disciplinary committee of the judicial district or judicial department wherein the
lawyer or law firm maintains its principal office. Where no such office is maintained, the
filing shall be made in the judicial department where the solicitation is targeted. A filing
shall consist of:
(i) a copy of the solicitation;
(ii) a transcript of the audio portion of any radio or television solicitation; and
(iii) if the solicitation is in a language other than English, an accurate English-language

translation.
(2) Such solicitation shall contain no reference to the fact of filing.
(3) If a solicitation is directed to a predetermined recipient, a list containing the names

and addresses of all recipients shall be retained by the lawyer or law firm for a period of
not less than three years following the last date of its dissemination.
(4) Solicitations filed pursuant to this subdivision shall be open to public inspection.
(5) The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to:
(i) a solicitation directed or disseminated to a close friend, relative, or former or existing

client;
(ii) a web site maintained by the lawyer or law firm, unless the web site is designed for
and directed to or targeted at a prospective client affected by an identifiable actual event
or occurrence or by an identifiable prospective defendant; or
(iii) professional cards or other announcements the distribution of which is authorized by

Rule 7.5 (a).
(d) A written solicitation shall not be sent by a method that requires the recipient to travel to a
location other than that at which the recipient ordinarily receives business or personal mail or that
requires a signature on the part of the recipient.
(e) No solicitation relating to a specific incident involving potential claims for personal injury or
wrongful death shall be disseminated before the 30th day after the date of the incident, unless a
filing must be made within 30 days of the incident as a legal prerequisite to the particular claim,
in which case no unsolicited communication shall be made before the 15th day after the date of
the incident.
(f ) Any solicitation made in writing or by computeraccessed communication and directed to a

pre-determined recipient, if prompted by a specific occurrence involving or affecting a recipient,
shall disclose how the lawyer obtained the identity of the recipient and learned of the recipient’s
potential legal need.
(g) If a retainer agreement is provided with any solicitation, the top of each page shall be marked
“SAMPLE” in red ink in a type size equal to the largest type size used in the agreement and the
words “DO NOT SIGN” shall appear on the client signature line.
(h) Any solicitation covered by this section shall include the name, principal law office address
and telephone number of the lawyer or law firm whose services are being offered.
(i) The provisions of this Rule shall apply to a lawyer or members of a law firm not admitted to
practice in this State who shall solicit retention by residents of this State.
RULE 7.4: Identification of Practice and Specialty
(a) A lawyer or law firm may publicly identify one or more areas of law in which the lawyer or
the law firm practices, or may state that the practice of the lawyer or law firm is limited to one or
more areas of law, provided that the lawyer or law firm shall not state that the lawyer or law firm
is a specialist or specializes in a particular field of law, except as provided in Rule 7.4 (c).
(b) A lawyer admitted to engage in patent practice before the United States Patent and Trademark
Office may use the designation “Patent Attorney” or a substantially similar designation.
(c) A lawyer may state that the lawyer has been recognized or certified as a specialist only as
follows:
(1) A lawyer who is certified as a specialist in a particular area of law or law practice by a
private organization approved for that purpose by the American Bar Association may
state the fact of certification if, in conjunction therewith, the certifying organization is
identified and the following statement is prominently made: “The [name of the private
certifying organization] is not affiliated with any governmental authority. Certification is
not a requirement for the practice of law in the State of New York and does not
necessarily indicate greater competence than other attorneys experienced in this field of
law;”
(2) A lawyer who is certified as a specialist in a particular area of law or law practice by
the authority having jurisdiction over specialization under the laws of another state or
territory may state the fact of certification if, in conjunction therewith, the certifying state
or territory is identified and the following statement is prominently made: “Certification
granted by the [identify state or territory] is not recognized by any governmental
authority within the State of New York. Certification is not a requirement for the practice
of law in the State of New York and does not necessarily indicate greater competence
than other attorneys experienced in this field of law.”
RULE 7.5: Professional Notices, Letterheads and Signs
(a) A lawyer or law firm may use internet web sites, professional cards, professional
announcement cards, office signs, letterheads or similar professional notices or devices, provided
the same do not violate any statute or court rule and are in accordance with Rule 7.1, including
the following:
(1) a professional card of a lawyer identifying the lawyer by name and as a lawyer, and
giving addresses, telephone numbers, the name of the law firm, and any information
permitted under Rule 7.1 (b) or Rule 7.4. A professional card of a law firm may also give
the names of members and associates;
(2) a professional announcement card stating new or changed associations or addresses,

change of firm name, or similar matters pertaining to the professional offices of a lawyer
or law firm or any nonlegal business conducted by the lawyer or law firm pursuant to
Rule 5.7. It may state biographical data, the names of members of the firm and associates,
and the names and dates of predecessor firms in a continuing line of succession. It may
state the nature of the legal practice if permitted under Rule 7.4;
(3) a sign in or near the office and in the building directory identifying the law office and
any nonlegal business conducted by the lawyer or law firm pursuant to Rule 5.7. The sign
may state the nature of the legal practice if permitted under Rule 7.4; or
(4) a letterhead identifying the lawyer by name and as a lawyer, and giving addresses,
telephone numbers, the name of the law firm, associates and any information permitted
under Rule 7.1 (b) or Rule 7.4. A letterhead of a law firm may also give the names of
members and associates, and names and dates relating to deceased and retired members.
A lawyer or law firm may be designated “Of Counsel” on a letterhead if there is a
continuing relationship with a lawyer or law firm, other than as a partner or associate. A
lawyer or law firm may be designated as “General Counsel” or by similar professional
reference on stationery of a client if the lawyer or the firm devotes a substantial amount
of professional time in the representation of that client. The letterhead of a law firm may
give the names and dates of predecessor firms in a continuing line of succession.
(b) A lawyer in private practice shall not practice under a trade name, a name that is misleading
as to the identity of the lawyer or lawyers practicing under such name, or a firm name containing
names other than those of one or more of the lawyers in the firm, except that the name of a
professional corporation shall contain “PC” or such symbols permitted by law, the name of a
limited liability company or partnership shall contain “LLC,” “LLP” or such symbols permitted
by law and, if otherwise lawful, a firm may use as, or continue to include in its name the name or
names of one or more deceased or retired members of the firm or of a predecessor firm in a
continuing line of succession. Such terms as “legal clinic,” “legal aid,” “legal service office,”
“legal assistance office,” “defender office” and the like may be used only by qualified legal
assistance organizations, except that the term “legal clinic” may be used by any lawyer or law
firm provided the name of a participating lawyer or firm is incorporated therein. A lawyer or law
firm may not include the name of a nonlawyer in its firm name, nor may a lawyer or law firm that
has a contractual relationship with a nonlegal professional or nonlegal professional service firm
pursuant to Rule 5.8 to provide legal and other professional services on a systematic and
continuing basis include in its firm name the name of the nonlegal professional service firm or
any individual nonlegal professional affiliated therewith. A lawyer who assumes a judicial,
legislative or public executive or administrative post or office shall not permit the lawyer’s name
to remain in the name of a law firm or to be used in professional notices of the firm during any
significant period in which the lawyer is not actively and regularly practicing law as a member of
the firm and, during such period, other members of the firm shall not use the lawyer’s name in the
firm name or in professional notices of the firm.
(c) Lawyers shall not hold themselves out as having a partnership with one or more other lawyers
unless they are in fact partners.
(d) A partnership shall not be formed or continued between or among lawyers licensed in
different jurisdictions unless all enumerations of the members and associates of the firm on its
letterhead and in other permissible listings make clear the jurisdictional limitations on those
members and associates of the firm not licensed to practice in all listed jurisdictions; however, the
same firm name may be used in each jurisdiction.
(e) A lawyer or law firm may utilize a domain name for an internet web site that does not include
the name of the lawyer or law firm provided:
(1) all pages of the web site clearly and conspicuously include the actual name of the
lawyer or law firm;
(2) the lawyer or law firm in no way attempts to engage in the practice of law using the
domain name;
(3) the domain name does not imply an ability to obtain results in a matter; and
(4) the domain name does not otherwise violate these Rules.
(f ) A lawyer or law firm may utilize a telephone number which contains a domain name,
nickname, moniker or motto that does not otherwise violate these Rules.
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION
STANDING COMMITTEE ON ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
Formal Opinion 10-457 August 5, 2010

Lawyer Websites
Websites have become a common means by which lawyers communicate with the public. Lawyers must not include
misleading information on websites, must be mindful of the expectations created by the website, and must carefully
manage inquiries invited through the website. Websites that invite inquiries may create a prospective client-lawyer
relationship under Rule 1.18. Lawyers who respond to website-initiated inquiries about legal services should
consider the possibility that Rule 1.18 may apply. 1
I. Introduction
Many lawyers and law firms have established websites as a means of communicating with the public. A
lawyer website can provide to anyone with Internet access a wide array of information about the law, legal
institutions, and the value of legal services. Websites also offer lawyers a twenty-four hour marketing tool by
calling attention to the particular qualifications of a lawyer or a law firm, explaining the scope of the legal services
they provide and describing their clientele, and adding an electronic link to contact an individual lawyer.
The obvious benefit of this information can diminish or disappear if the website visitor misunderstands or
is misled by website information and features. A website visitor might rely on general legal information to answer a
personal legal question. Another might assume that a website’s provision of direct electronic contact to a lawyer
implies that the lawyer agrees to preserve the confidentiality of information disclosed by website visitors.
For lawyers, website marketing can give rise to the problem of unanticipated reliance or unexpected
inquiries or information from website visitors seeking legal advice. This opinion addresses some of the ethical
obligations that lawyers should address in considering the content and features of their websites. 2
II. Website Content
A. Information about Lawyers, their Law Firm, or their Clients
Lawyer websites may provide biographical information about lawyers, including educational background,
experience, area of practice, and contact information (telephone, facsimile and e-mail address). A website also may
add information about the law firm, such as its history, experience, and areas of practice, including general
descriptions about prior engagements. More specific information about a lawyer or law firm’s former or current
clients, including clients’ identities, matters handled, or results obtained also might be included.
Any of this information constitutes a “communication about the lawyer or the lawyer’s services,” and is
therefore subject to the requirements of Model Rule 7.1 3 as well as the prohibitions against false and misleading
statements in Rules 8.4(c) (generally) and 4.1(a) (when representing clients). Together, these rules prohibit false,
fraudulent or misleading statements of law or fact. Thus, no website communication may be false or misleading, or
may omit facts such that the resulting statement is materially misleading. Rules 5.1 and 5.3 extend this obligation to
managerial lawyers in law firms by obligating them to make reasonable efforts to ensure the firm has in place
measures giving reasonable assurance that all firm lawyers and nonlawyer assistants will comply with the rules of
professional conduct.
1
This opinion is based on the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct as amended by the ABA House of Delegates through August 2010. The
laws, court rules, regulations, rules of professional conduct, and opinions promulgated in individual jurisdictions are controlling.
2
We do not deal here with website content generated by governmental lawyers or offices or by non-profit law advocacy firms or organizations.
See, e.g., In re Primus, 436 U.S. 412 (1978) (discussing how solicitation of prospective litigants by nonprofit organizations that engage in
litigation as form of political expression and political association constitutes expressive and associational conduct entitled to First Amendment
protection, which government may regulate only narrowly).
3
See, e.g., Arizona State Bar Op. 97-04 (1997), available at http://www.myazbar.org/Ethics/opinionview.cfm?id=480; California Standing
Committee on Prof'l Resp. and Conduct Formal Op. 2001-155, 2001 WL 34029609 (2001); Hawaii Sup. Ct. Disc. Bd. Formal Op. 41 (2001),
available at http://www.odchawaii.com/FORMAL_WRITTEN_OPINIONS.html; South Carolina Bar Eth. Advisory Committee Op. 04-06, 2004
WL 1520110 *1 (2004); Vermont Advisory Eth. Op. 2000-04, available at
http://www.vtbar.org/Upload%20Files/WebPages/Attorney%20Resources/aeopinions/Advisory%20Ethics%20Opinions/Advertising/advertising.
htm. Many state and local ethics opinions are published online can be accessed through the ABA Center for Professional Responsibility website
at http://www.abanet.org/cpr/links.html.
10-457 Formal Opinion 2
As applied to lawyer websites, these rules allow a lawyer to include accurate information that is not
misleading about the lawyer and the lawyer’s law firm, including contact information and information about the law
practice. 4 To avoid misleading readers, this information should be updated on a regular basis.5 Specific
information that identifies current or former clients or the scope of their matters also may be disclosed, as long as the
clients or former clients give informed consent 6 as required by Rules 1.6 (current clients) and 1.9 (former clients). 7
Website disclosure of client identifying information is not normally impliedly authorized because the disclosure is
not being made to carry out the representation of a client, but to promote the lawyer or the law firm. 8
B. Information about the Law
Lawyers have long offered legal information to the public in a variety of ways, such as by writing books or
articles, giving talks to groups, or staffing legal hotlines. Lawyer websites also can assist the public in
understanding the law and in identifying when and how to obtain legal services.9 Legal information might include
general information about the law applicable to a lawyer’s area(s) of practice, as well as links to other websites,
blogs, or forums with related information. Information may be presented in narrative form, in a “FAQ” (frequently
asked questions) format, in a “Q & A” (question and answer) format, or in some other manner. 10
Legal information, like information about a lawyer or the lawyer’s services, must meet the requirements of
Rules 7.1, 8.4(c), and 4.1(a). Lawyers may offer accurate legal information that does not materially mislead
reasonable readers. 11 To avoid misleading readers, lawyers should make sure that legal information is accurate and
current, 12 and should include qualifying statements or disclaimers that “may preclude a finding that a statement is
likely to create unjustified expectations or otherwise mislead a prospective client.” 13 Although no exact line can be
drawn between legal information and legal advice, both the context and content of the information offered are
helpful in distinguishing between the two. 14
4
See, e.g., North Carolina State Bar Formal Eth. Op. 2009-6 (2009) (firm may provide case summaries on website, including accurate
information about verdicts and settlements, as long as it adds specific information about factual and legal circumstances of cases ((complexity,
whether liability or damages were contested, whether opposing party was represented by counsel, firm’s success in collecting judgment)) in
conjunction with appropriate disclaimer to preclude misleading prospective clients).
5
See, e.g., Missouri Bar Inf. Advisory Op. 20060005 (2006) (firm must remove lawyer’s biographical information within reasonable time after
lawyer leaves firm).
6
See, e.g., Ohio Advisory Op. 2000-6, 2000 WL 1872572 *5 (2000) (law firm may list client’s name on firm website with client’s informed
consent). See also New York Rule of Professional Conduct 7.1(b) (2) (2009) (lawyer may advertise name of regularly represented client,
provided that client has given prior written consent).
7
These rules apply to “all information relating to the representation, whatever its source” including publicly available information. Model Rule
1.6 cmt. 3. The consent can be oral or written. Rules 1.6 and 1.9(c) require informed consent, but do not require a written confirmation.
8
See ABA Committee on Eth. and Prof’l Responsibility, Formal Op. 09-455 (2009) (Disclosure of Conflicts Information When Lawyers Move
Between Law Firms) (absent demonstrable benefit to client’s representation, disclosure of client identifying information, including client’s name
and nature of matter handled, is not impliedly authorized under Rule 1.6(a)).
9
Model Rule 7.2 Comment [1] acknowledges that the “public’s need to know about legal services can be fulfilled in part through advertising,” a
need that may be “particularly acute” in the case of persons who have not made extensive use of, or fear they may not be able to pay for, legal
services.
10
See, e.g., Vermont Advisory Eth. Op. 2000-04, supra note 3 (lawyer may use “frequently asked questions” format as long as information is
current, accurate, and includes clear statement that it does not constitute legal advice and readers should not rely on it to solve individual
problem).
11
Rule 7.1 Comment [2] provides that a “truthful statement is also misleading if there is a substantial likelihood that it will lead a reasonable
person to formulate a specific conclusion ... for which there is no reasonable factual foundation.”
12
ABA Law Practice Management Section, Best Practice Guidelines for Legal Information Web Site Providers 1 (Feb. 2003), available at
http://meetings.abanet.org/webupload/commupload/EP024500/relatedresources/best_practice_guidelines.pdf
(website providing legal information should provide full and accurate information about identity and contact details of provider on each page of
website, as well as dates on which substantive content was last reviewed).
13
Model Rule 7.1 cmt. 3. See, e.g., ABA Law Practice Management Section, Best Practice Guidelines, supra note 12 at 2 (website providers
should avoid misleading users about jurisdiction to which site’s content relates, and if clearly state-specific, the jurisdiction in which the law
applies should be identified).
14
See, e.g., Arizona State Bar Op. 97-04, supra note 3 (because of inability to screen for conflicts of interest and possibility of disclosing
confidential information, lawyers should not answer specific legal questions posed by laypersons in Internet chat rooms unless question presented
is of general nature and advice given is not fact-specific); California Standing Committee on Prof'l Resp. and Conduct Formal Op. 2003-164,
2003 WL 23146203 (2003) (legal advice includes making recommendations about specific course of action to follow; public context of radio
call-in show that includes warnings about information not being substitute for individualized legal advice makes it unlikely lawyers have agreed
to act as caller’s lawyer); South Carolina Bar Eth. Advisory Committee Op. 94-27 *2 (1995), 1995 WL 934127 (lawyer may maintain electronic
presence for purpose of discussing legal topics, but must obtain sufficient information to make conflicts check before offering legal advice); Utah
Eth. Op. 95-01 (1995), 1995 WL 49472 *1 (“how to” booklet on legal subject matter does not constitute practice of law).
With respect to context, lawyers who speak to groups generally have been characterized as offering only
general legal information. With respect to content, lawyers who answer fact-specific legal questions may be
characterized as offering personal legal advice, especially if the lawyer is responding to a question that can
reasonably be understood to refer to the questioner’s individual circumstances. However, a lawyer who poses and
answers a hypothetical question usually will not be characterized as offering legal advice. To avoid
misunderstanding, our previous opinions have recommended that lawyers who provide general legal information
include statements that characterize the information as general in nature and caution that it should not be understood
as a substitute for personal legal advice. 15
Such a warning is especially useful for website visitors who may be inexperienced in using legal services,
and may believe that they can rely on general legal information to solve their specific problem. 16 It would be
prudent to avoid any misunderstanding by warning visitors that the legal information provided is general and should
not be relied on as legal advice, and by explaining that legal advice cannot be given without full consideration of all
relevant information relating to the visitor’s individual situation.
C. Website Visitor Inquiries
Inquiries from a website visitor about legal advice or representation may raise an issue concerning the
application of Rule 1.18 (Duties to Prospective Clients). 17 Rule 1.18 protects the confidentiality of prospective
client communications. It also recognizes several ways that lawyers may limit subsequent disqualification based on
these prospective client disclosures when they decide not to undertake a matter. 18
Rule 1.18(a) addresses whether the inquirer has become a “prospective client,” defined as “a person who
discusses with a lawyer the possibility of forming a client-lawyer relationship.”
15
ABA Inf. Op. 85-1512 (1985) (Establishment of Private Multistate Lawyer Referral Service by Nonprofit Religious Organization), in
FORMAL AND INFORMAL ETHICS OPINIONS: FORMAL OPINIONS
1983-1998, at 550, 551 (ABA 2000) (not unethical to prepare articles of general legal information for lay public, but may be prudent to include
statement that information furnished is only general and not substitute for personalized legal advice); ABA Inf. Op. 85-1510 (1985)
(Establishment of Multistate Private Lawyer Referral Service for Benefit of Subscribers to Corporation's Services), in FORMAL AND
INFORMAL ETHICS OPINIONS: FORMAL OPINIONS 1983-1998, at 544, 545 (corporate counsel may author articles of general legal
information for corporations’ subscriber newsletter, but “good practice” to include a statement that information is only general in nature and not
substitute for personal legal advice).
16
See, e.g., ABA Law Practice Management Section, Best Practice Guidelines, supra note 12 at 3 (websites that provide legal information should
give users conspicuous notice that information does not constitute legal advice). Some state opinions also warn against providing specific or
particularized facts in a lawyer’s communication to avoid creating a client-lawyer relationship. See also District of Columbia Bar Eth. Op. 316
(2002), available at http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/ethics/legal_ethics/opinions/opinion316.cfm (online chat rooms and listserves); Maryland
State Bar Ass’n Committee on Eth. Op. 2007-18 (2008) (lawyer conducting domestic relations law seminars for lay public); New Jersey Advisory
Committee on Prof'l Eth. Op. 712 (2008) (Attorney-Staffed Legal Hotline For Members of Nonprofit Trade Association), available at
http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/ethics/acpe/acp712_1.html (lawyer staffing telephone hotline); New Jersey Advisory Committee on Prof'l Eth. Op
671, 1993 WL 137685 (1993) (Activities and Obligations of Pro Bono Attorneys), (lawyer-volunteer at abused women shelter); New Mexico Bar
Op. 2001-1 (2001) (Application of Rules of Professional Conduct to Lawyer's Use of Listserve-type Message Boards and Communications)
(listserves); Wisconsin Prof'l Eth. Committee Op. E-95-5 (1995), available at
http://www.wisbar.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Legal_Research&Template=/CustomSource/Search/Search.cfm&output=xml_no_dtd&proxy
stylesheet=wisbar5&client=wisbar5&filter=1&start=0&Site=SBW&q=%22formal+opinion%22+E%2D95%2D5&submit=ethics (lawyer-
volunteer at organization that provides information about landlord-tenant law). The Model Rules defer to “principles of substantive law external
to these Rules [to] determine when a client-lawyer relationship exists.” Scope cmt. 17.
17
See, e.g., Arizona State Bar Op. 02-04 (2002), available at http://www.myazbar.org/Ethics/opinionview.cfm?id=288 (lawyer does not owe duty
of confidentiality to individuals who unilaterally e-mail inquiries to lawyer when e-mail is unsolicited); California Standing Committee on Prof'l
Resp. and Conduct Formal Op. 2001-155, supra note 3 (lawyer may avoid incurring duty of confidentiality to persons who seek legal services by
visiting lawyer’s website and disclose confidential information only if site contains clear disclaimer); Iowa Bar Ass'n Eth. Op. 07-02 (2007),
available at
http://www.iowabar.org/ethics.nsf/e61beed77a215f6686256497004ce492/cb0a70672d69d8c1862573380013fb9d?OpenDocument (message that
encourages detailed response about case could in some situations be considered bilateral); New Hampshire Bar Ass'n Eth. Committee Op. 2009-
2010/1(2009), available at
http://www.nhbar.org/legal-links/ethics1.asp (when law firm’s website invites public to send e-mail to one of firm’s lawyers, it is opening itself to
potential obligations to prospective clients); Ass'n of the Bar of the City of New York, Formal Op. 2001-1 (2001) (Obligations Of Law Firm
Receiving Unsolicited E-Mail Communications From Prospective Client ), available at http://www.abcny.org/Ethics/eth2001-01.html (where
firm website does not adequately warn that information transmitted will not be treated as confidential, information should be held in confidence
by lawyer receiving communication and not disclosed to or used for benefit of another client even though lawyer declines to represent potential
client); New Jersey Advisory Committee on Prof'l Eth. Op. 695, 2004 WL 833032 (2004) (firm has duty to keep information received from
prospective client confidential); San Diego County Bar Ass'n Eth. Op. 2006-1 (2006), available at
http://www.sdcba.org/index.cfm?Pg=ethicsopinion06-1 (private information received from non-client via unsolicited e-mail is not required to be
held as confidential if lawyer has not had opportunity to warn or stop flow of information at or before the communication is delivered).
18
Lawyers do not normally owe confidentiality obligations to persons who are not clients (protected by Rule 1.6), former clients (Rule 1.9), or
prospective clients (Rule 1.18).
To “discuss,” meaning to talk about, generally contemplates a two-way communication, which necessarily must
begin with an initial communication. 19 Rule 1.18 implicitly recognizes that this initial communication can come
either from a lawyer or a person who wishes to become a prospective client.
Rule 1.18 Comment [2] also recognizes that not all initial communications from persons who wish to be
prospective clients necessarily result in a “discussion” within the meaning of the rule: “a person who communicates
information unilaterally to a lawyer, without any reasonable expectation that the lawyer is willing to discuss the
possibility of forming a client-lawyer relationship, is not a prospective client.”
For example, if a lawyer website specifically requests or invites submission of information concerning the
possibility of forming a client-lawyer relationship with respect to a matter, a discussion, as that term is used in Rule
1.18, will result when a website visitor submits the requested information. 20 If a website visitor submits information
to a site that does not specifically request or invite this, the lawyer’s response to that submission will determine
whether a discussion under Rule 1.18 has occurred.
A telephone, mail or e-mail exchange between an individual seeking legal services and a lawyer is
analogous. 21 In these contexts, the lawyer takes part in a bilateral discussion about the possibility of forming a
client-lawyer relationship and has the opportunity to limit or encourage the flow of information. For example, the
lawyer may ask for additional details or may caution against providing any personal or sensitive information until a
conflicts check can be completed.
Lawyers have a similar ability on their websites to control features and content so as to invite, encourage,
limit, or discourage the flow of information to and from website visitors. 22 A particular website might facilitate a
very direct and almost immediate bilateral communication in response to marketing information about a specific
lawyer. It might, for example, specifically encourage a website visitor to submit a personal inquiry about a proposed
representation on a conveniently-provided website electronic form which, when responded to, begins a “discussion”
about a proposed representation and, absent any cautionary language, invites submission of confidential
information. 23 Another website might describe the work of the law firm and each of its lawyers, list only contact
information such as a telephone number, e-mail or street address, or provide a website e-mail link to a lawyer.
Providing such information alone does not create a reasonable expectation that the lawyer is willing to discuss a
specific client-lawyer relationship. 24 A lawyer’s response to an inquiry submitted by a visitor who uses this contact
information may, however, begin a “discussion” within the meaning of Rule 1.18.
In between these two examples, a variety of website content and features might indicate that a lawyer has
agreed to discuss a possible client-lawyer relationship. A former client’s website communication to a lawyer about
a new matter must be analyzed in light of their previous relationship, which may have given rise to a reasonable
expectation of confidentiality. 25 But a person who knows that the lawyer already declined a particular
representation or is already representing an adverse party can neither reasonably expect confidentiality, nor
reasonably believe that
19
For example, in ABA Committee on Eth. and Prof’l Responsibility, Formal Op. 90-358 (1990) (Protection of Information Imparted by
Prospective Client), this Committee considered the obligations of a lawyer who engaged in such a “discussion” in the context of a face-to-face
meeting.
20
Rule 1.18 cmt. 1.
21
See, e.g., Virginia Legal Eth. Op. 1842 (2008), available at http://www.vacle.org/opinions/1842.htm (absent voicemail message that asks for
detailed information, providing phone number and voicemail is an invitation only to contact lawyer, not to submit confidential information); Iowa
State Bar Ass'n Eth. Op. 07-02 ("Communication from and with Potential Clients), available at
http://www.iowabar.org/ethics.nsf/e61beed77a215f6686256497004ce492/cb0a70672d69d8c1862573380013fb9d?OpenDocument (telephone
voicemail message that simply asks for contact details does not give rise to bilateral communication, but message that encourages caller to leave
detailed messages about their case could be considered bilateral).
22
See, e.g., Arizona State Bar Op. 02-04 (2002), available at http://www.myazbar.org/Ethics/opinionview.cfm?id=288 (lawyers who maintain
websites with e-mail links should include disclaimers to clarify whether e-mail communications from prospective clients will be treated as
confidential); Massachusetts Bar Ass'n Op. 07-01 (2007), available at http://www.massbar.org/publications/ethics-opinions/2000-
2009/2007/opinion-07-01 (lawyer who receives unsolicited information from prospective client through e-mail link on law firm website without
effective disclaimer must hold information confidential because law firm has opportunity to set conditions on flow of information); South Dakota
Bar Eth. Op. 2002-2 (2002) (lawyer’s website that invites viewers to send e-mail through jump site creates expectation of confidentiality).
23
See, e.g., Iowa State Bar Ass'n Eth. Op. 07-02, supra note 21 (web page inviting specific questions constitutes bilateral communication with
expectation of confidentiality) and Virginia Legal Eth. Op. 1842 supra note 21 (website that specifically invites visitor to submit information in
exchange for evaluation invites formation of client-lawyer relationship).
24
E-mails received from unknown persons who send them apart from the lawyer’s website may even more easily be viewed as unsolicited. See,
e.g., Arizona State Bar Op. 02-04, supra note 22 (e-mail to multiple lawyers asking for representation); Iowa State Bar Ass'n Eth. Op. 07-02,
supra note 21 (website that gives contact information does not without more indicate that lawyer requested or consented to sending of
confidential information); San Diego County Bar Assn. Op. 2006-1, available at http://www.sdcba.org/index.cfm?Pg=ethicsopinion06-1 (inquirer
found lawyer’s e-mail address on state bar membership records website accessible to the public).
25
See, e.g., Iowa State Bar Ass'n Committee Eth. Op. 07-02, supra note 22 (lack of prior relationship with person sending unsolicited e-mail
requesting representation was one factor in determining whether communicator’s disclosures were unilateral and whether expectation of
the lawyer wishes to discuss a client-lawyer relationship. Similarly, a person who purports to be a prospective client
and who communicates with a number of lawyers with the intent to prevent other parties from retaining them in the
same matter should have no reasonable expectation of confidentiality or that the lawyer would refrain from an
adverse representation. 26
In other circumstances, it may be difficult to predict when the overall message of a given website
communicates a willingness by a lawyer to discuss a particular prospective client-lawyer relationship. Imprecision
in a website message and failure to include a clarifying disclaimer may result in a website visitor reasonably viewing
the website communication itself as the first step in a discussion. 27 Lawyers are therefore well-advised to consider
that a website-generated inquiry may have come from a prospective client, and should pay special attention to
including the appropriate warnings mentioned in the next section.
If a discussion with a prospective client has occurred, Rule 1.18(b) prohibits use or disclosure of
information learned during such a discussion absent the prospective client’s informed consent. 28 When the
discussion reveals a conflict of interest, the lawyer should decline the representation, 29 and cannot disclose the
information received without the informed consent of the prospective client. 30 For various reasons, including the
need for a conflicts check, the lawyer may have tried to limit the initial discussion and may have clearly expressed
those limitations to the prospective client. If this has been done, any information given to the lawyer that exceeds
those express limitations generally would not be protected under Rule 1.18(b).
Rule 1.18(c) disqualifies lawyers and their law firms who have received information that “could be
significantly harmful” to the prospective client from representing others with adverse interests in the same or
substantially related matters. 31 For example, if a prospective client previously had disclosed only an intention to
bring a particular lawsuit and has now retained a different lawyer to initiate the same suit, it is difficult to imagine
any significant harm that could result from the law firm proceeding with the defense of the same matter. 32 On the
other hand, absent an appropriate warning, the prospective client’s prior disclosure of more extensive facts about the
matter may well be disqualifying.
Rule 1.18(d) creates two exceptions that allow subsequent adverse representation even if the prospective
client disclosed information that was significantly harmful: (1) informed consent confirmed in writing from both the
affected and the prospective client, or (2) reasonable measures to limit the disqualifying information, combined with
timely screening of the disqualified lawyer from the subsequent adverse matter. Rule 1.18(d) (2) specifically would
allow the law firm (but not the contacted lawyer) to "undertake or continue" the representation of someone with
adverse interests without receiving the informed consent of the prospective client if the lawyer who initially received
the information took reasonable precautions to limit the prospective client’s initial disclosures and was timely
screened from further involvement in the matter as required by Rule 1.0(k).
III. Warnings or Cautionary Statements Intended to Limit, Condition, or Disclaim a Lawyer’s Obligations to
Website Visitors
Warnings or cautionary statements on a lawyer’s website can be designed to and may effectively limit,
condition, or disclaim a lawyer’s obligation to a website reader. Such warnings or statements may be written so as
confidentiality was reasonable); Oregon Eth. Op. 2005-146, 2005 WL 5679570 *1 (2005) (lawyer who sends periodic reminders to former clients
risks giving recipients reasonable belief they are still current clients).
26
See, e.g., Virginia Legal Eth. Op. 1794 (2004), available at http://www.vacle.org/opinions/1794.htm (person who meets with lawyer for
primary purpose of precluding others from obtaining legal representation does not have reasonable expectation of confidentiality); Ass’n of the
Bar of the City of New York Committee on Prof'l and Jud. Eth. Formal Op. 2001-1 (2001), available at
http://www.abcny.org/Ethics/eth2001.html (“taint shoppers,” who interview lawyers or law firms for purpose of disqualifying them from future
adverse representation, have no good faith expectation of confidentiality).
27
See e.g., Massachusetts Bar Ass'n Op. 07-01, supra note 22 (in absence of effective disclaimer, prospective client visiting law firm website that
markets background and qualifications of each lawyer in attractive light, stresses lawyer’s skill at solving clients’ practical problems, and
provides e-mail link for immediate communication with that lawyer might reasonably conclude that firm and its individual lawyers have
implicitly “agreed to consider” whether to form client-lawyer relationship).
28
Rule 1.18(b) allows disclosure or use if permitted by Rule 1.9. Rule 1.9(c) (2) and its Comment [7] in turn link disclosure to Rule 1.6, the
general confidentiality rule, which requires client informed consent to disclosure.
29
Rule 1.18 cmt. 4.
30
Rule 1.18 cmt. 3.
31
See also RESTATEMENT (THIRD) OF THE LAW GOVERNING LAWYERS § 15 (2) (2000).
32
Rule 1.18 cmt. 5 also allows lawyers to condition an initial conversation on the prospective client’s informed consent to subsequent adverse
representation in the same matter or subsequent use of any confidential information provided.
to avoid a misunderstanding by the website visitor that (1) a client-lawyer relationship has been created; 33 (2) the
visitor’s information will be kept confidential; 34 (3) legal advice has been given; 35 or (4) the lawyer will be
prevented from representing an adverse party. 36
Limitations, conditions, or disclaimers of lawyer obligations will be effective only if reasonably
understandable, properly placed, and not misleading. This requires a clear warning in a readable format whose
meaning can be understood by a reasonable person. 37 If the website uses a particular language, any waiver,
disclaimer, limitation, or condition must be in the same language. The appropriate information should be
conspicuously placed to assure that the reader is likely to see it before proceeding.38
Finally, a limitation, condition, waiver, or disclaimer may be undercut if the lawyer acts or communicates
contrary to its warning.
33
See, e.g., New Mexico Bar Op. 2001-1 (2001), available at http://www.nmbar.org/legalresearch/ethicsadvisoryopinions.html (appropriate
disclaimers of attorney-client relationship should accompany any response to listserve message board, but any response that would suggest to
reasonable person that, despite disclaimer, relationship is being or has been established, would negate disclaimer); North Carolina State Bar
Formal Eth. Op. 2000-3, 2000 WL 33300702 *2 (2000) (Responding to Inquiries Posted on a Message Board on the Web) (lawyers who do not
want to create client-lawyer relationships on law firm message board should use specific disclaimers on any communications with inquirers, but
substantive law will determine whether client-lawyer relationship is created); Ass’n of the Bar of the City of New York Committee on Prof'l and
Jud. Eth. Formal Op. 1998-2 (1998), available at http://www.abcny.org/Ethics/eth1998-2.htm (disclaimer that “if specific legal advice is sought,
we will indicate that this requires establishment of an attorney-client relationship which cannot be carried out through the use of a web page” may
not necessarily serve to shield law firm from claim that attorney-client relationship was established by specific on-line communications); Utah
State Bar Eth. Advisory Op. Committee Op. 96-12, 1997 WL 45137 *1 (1997) (“if legal advice is sought from an attorney, if the advice sought is
pertinent to the attorney’s profession, and if the attorney gives the advice for which fees will be charged, an attorney-client relationship is created
that cannot be disclaimed by the attorney giving the advice”); Vermont Bar Ass'n Advisory Eth. Op. 2000-04 (2000), supra note 3 (despite
website caveat and disclaimers, nonlawyer may still rely on information on website or lawyer’s responses; disclaimer cannot preclude possibility
of establishing client-lawyer relationship in an individual case).
34
The Committee does not opine whether a confidentiality waiver might affect the attorney-client privilege. See, e.g., Barton v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for
the Cent. Dist. of Cal., 410 F. 3d 1104, 1111-12 (9th Cir. 2005) (checking “yes” box on law firm website that acknowledged providing
information in answer to questionnaire “does not constitute a request for legal advice and I am not forming an attorney-client relationship by
submitting this information” did not waive attorney-client privilege because confidentiality was not mentioned in attempted disclaimer and
questionnaires were nevertheless submitted in course of seeking attorney-client relationship in potential class action). Cf. Schiller v. The City of
New York, 245 F.R.D. 112, 117-18 (S.D.N.Y. 2007) (although privilege may protect pre-engagement communications from prospective clients,
it does not apply to person who completed questionnaires soliciting information from N.Y. Civil Liberties Union to allow it to “effectively
advocate for change”). See also David Hricik, To Whom it May Concern: Using Disclaimers to Avoid Disqualification by Receipt of Unsolicited
E-Mail from Prospective Clients, 16 ABA PROFESSIONAL LAWYER 1, 5 (2005) (agreement that waives all confidentiality tries to do too much and
might destroy the ability of prospective client who eventually becomes firm client to claim privilege).
35
See note 15 supra.
36
Rule 1.18 cmt. 5.
37
See, e.g., California Bar Committee on Prof'l Resp. Op. 2005-168, 2005 WL 3068090 *4 (2005) (finding disclaimer stating that “confidential
relationship” would not be formed was not enough to waive confidentiality, because it confused not forming client-lawyer relationship with
agreeing to keep communications confidential).
38
See, e.g., District of Columbia Bar Eth. Op. 302 (2000), available at
http://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/ethics/legal_ethics/opinions/opinion302.cfm (lawyers may want to use “click through” pages that
automatically direct the reader to another webpage containing disclaimers to ensure that visitors are not misled and other devices such as
confirmatory messages that clarify nature of relationship); Virginia Legal Eth. Op. 1842, supra note 21 (approving of prominent “click through”
disclaimers that require readers to assent to terms of disclaimer before submitting information). Courts have refused to uphold disclaimers or
licensing agreements that appeared on separate pages and did not require a reader’s affirmative consent to their terms because they did not
provide reasonable notice). See, e.g., Sprecht v. Netscape Communications Corp., 306 F.3d 17, 31-32 (2d Cir. 2002). On the other hand, courts
have upheld website restrictions that provided actual knowledge by presenting the information and requiring an affirmative action (a click
through or “clickwrap” agreement) before gaining access to the website content. See, e.g., Register.com v. Verio, 356 F.3d 393, 401-02 (2d Cir.
2004).
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION STANDING COMMITTEE ON ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY

321 N. Clark Street, Chicago, Illinois 60654-4714 Telephone (312)988-5300
CHAIR: Robert Mundheim, New York, NY Robert A. Creamer, Evanston, IL Terrence M. Franklin, Los Angeles,
CA Paula J. Frederick, Atlanta, GA Bruce A. Green, New York, NY James M. McCauley, Richmond, VA
Susan R. Martyn, Toledo, OH Mary Robinson, Downers Grove, IL Philip H. Schaeffer, New York, NY
E. Norman Veasey, Wilmington, DE
CENTER FOR PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY: George A. Kuhlman, Ethics Counsel; Eileen B. Libby,
Associate Ethics Counsel ©2010 by the American Bar Association. All rights reserved.
12 Changes to Florida Bar Advertising Rules for 2013
Posted by Peter Boyd on February 6, 2013 in Rants & Raves, Web Site Design
This is a review of the Florida Bar’s new advertising rules. Since we are a web design and internet
marketing company, we are mainly reviewing the rules from a perspective of interactive
media. However, note the rules apply to any advertisement (print, radio, TV, direct mail, websites,
social media and anything on the Internet).
Overall, the rules are relaxed and consolidated. They are easy to follow and dictate how you can
advertise.
Want to use testimonials? Great! You can. Just follow some simple rules.
Want to showcase your big wins? Great. You can. So long as you can back up your
statements, and do not mislead the public, you should be fine.
There are more technical rules that you will want to read here
[http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/2013/sc11-1327.pdf] and see our comments below.
Issue – Social Networking & Banner Ads

One issue that may need to be resolved by the Bar and Florida Supreme Court is the use of social
networking. Right now, it is lumped in with all advertisements, which may create some issues with
precise language and following the rules specifically (i.e. how to put your name and office location on
every single Tweet or Facebook post). Of course, hopefully the Bar only means your social
networking page needs to have that info, but even that may be an issue due to character restrictions on
some platforms. So we will have to see if this leads to any changes or cases about this topic.
We called the Florida Bar Hotline number (850-561-5780)and asked about social networking
posts. Per Florida Bar, every Tweet must include the name of the lawyer, law firm and office
address! Every Facebook post also needs to have that info, according to the Florida Bar. So, if you
have a long name, longer firm name, and have an office on a long street, you probably can Tweet
about 20 to 50 characters of the 140 character limit. Fun!
Another potential issue is banner ads. Google Adwords, and other ad systems, have set amount of
character limits. There is no real possibility to list the firm name, location, and attorney in charge of
the advertisement in the ad (and make the ad effective). My suggestion is that the Bar should simply
consider those differently and so long as the ad goes to the firm’s website that lists that information
that should be fine. However, the rules are not specific on banner ads so far.
Anyways, overall the new rules are a welcome change. It makes everything simpler.
12 Changes to Florida Bar Advertising Rules
1. All Advertisements are covered by the Rules. There are exceptions detailed in the statute, but in
general all websites, print ads, brochures, direct mail, email, billboards, video, TV, radio, sand script,
signal flags, hieroglyphics, and other forms of communication are covered.
2. “Say that you Love Me” – So long as an advertisement is objectively verifiable, then that statement
will not violate the rules. This is a huge change and allows for lots of different ideas. Just make sure
you can prove that you love me or have one that case.
3. Don’t Use Superlatives, without Proof – Again, don’t say you are the “Best Trial Lawyer in
Florida.” That is misleading and not verifiable. Unless there is some new Olympic competition that
we do not know about, don’t use “Best” (and no, winning moot court probably does not count).
4. Websites do not Need to be Reviewed – Websites do not need to follow the filing and review
requirements by the bar. Of course, you will want to have a professional review your website for
general errors, design mistakes, and poor organization (we see those too many times).
5. Testimonials – Testimonials are allowed, so long as you follow specific guidelines and have a
disclaimer.
6. Past Results – Toot your own horn. If you have won a big case, you can put it on your website, so
long as it is objectively verifiable.
7. Websites same as other Ads – Previously, websites were deemed requests for information, so they
did not need to follow all rules. This has been changed, websites must follow the rules. The Court
also declined to adopt the “two-click” rule for testimonials and past results. That is actually good, so
long as your testimonials follow certain guidelines and your past results are factually accurate, you are
set.
8. Brochures and Other Requests for Info – Also any other information upon request is exempt from
filing and review. So that is good for brochures that lawyers give out in meetings and in their office.
9. Burden of Proof – Best of all, the Florida Supreme Court states that the Bar has the burden of
proving a statement is false or not objectively verifiable. So if a lawyer is brought before the Bar’s
disciplinary proceeding, then the attorney has an opportunity to defend and the burden is on the Bar.
10. Comments are for Guidance Only – The new rules speak for themselves, but the Florida Bar &
Florida Supreme Court does give some guidance.
11. New Rules Numbers – The Florida Supreme Court adopted the new rules proposed by the Florida
Bar. They deleted all prior subchapter 4-7 rules. They smartly renumbered the new rules to avoid
confusion with prior rules.
12. Judge Dredd – Florida Supreme Court dictates how judges can call themselves. Basically use
“Joseph Dredd, Florida member, former circuit judge” or “Joseph Dredd, retired circuit judge.” Just
don’t call yourself “Judge Dredd” unless you are a current Judge.
If you want to see to see our detailed analysis of the Florida Bar Rules, please review our long
post. Yes, it’s long, but worth the read.
If you have any other big changes in the rules, leave a comment.
ROSS FISHMAN, J.D.
Called “one of the coun- presented. FM campaigns also received one of Inc. maga-
try’s leading experts on zine’s ten Marketing Masters awards for a “brilliant and
law firm marketing” by successful” marketing program. In 1998, Ross received
Lawyers Weekly USA, Ross LMA’s first peer-selected Lifetime Achievement Award,
is known for developing and was later the first marketer inducted into the LMA’s
the legal profession’s most Hall of Fame.
innovative and effective
brands and websites. As “Ross has a stronger sense of
CEO of Fishman Market- what will create ‘buzz’ than
ing, Inc., he has success- anyone else in the market.”
fully differentiated 200 Rick Klau, Google, Inc.
law firms, helping them
generate significant reve-
nue and dominate practice
areas, industries, and geographic markets from Indiana Known for his “educational and entertaining” presenta-
to Istanbul. tion style, he has conducted nearly 300 firm retreats and
training programs on five continents, from Tobago to
“Ross was going to win in so many Thailand — including once presenting on three conti-
categories that LMA created the ‘Best nents within 24 hours. A Fellow of the College of Law
in Show’ so he’d win one grand prize Practice Management, Ross has written 250 bylined ar-
instead of nearly all the trophies” ticles, including five monthly columns, and has sat on the
LMA’s “In The Loop,” Fall 2009 editorial board of five national magazines.
An active LMA member since 1990, Ross has been the

Vice President, a member of both the Strategic Planning
and Best Practice Task Forces; chair and moderator of
Ross was a commercial litigator from 1985-90 before seven consecutive QuickStart conferences; and creator
moving to Winston & Strawn to practice marketing full- and host of “Just JDs,” LMA’s first full-day program ex-
time, later becoming Client Service and Marketing Part- clusively for lawyers. The 2013-14 chairman of LMA’s
ner of Ungaretti & Harris. Ethics Task Force, Ross has been the expert witness in
three precedent-setting branding- and social media-relat-
Called “the creative mind behind a host of law firm cam- ed lawsuits.
paigns that have redefined the field” (San Jose Business
Journal), FM has received countless international mar-
keting awards for powerful, revenue-generating market-
ing campaigns and websites, including the LMA’s grand “Ross is a litigator-turned-
prize, the Best of Show award, five of the ten times ever marketer whose company
“Ross Fishman is the legal profession’s

Don Draper. His work isn’t just
A 1986 member of the federal Trial Bar (N.D. Ill), he
Stephen Gold, received a B.A. in Speech Communications, cum laude,
VP, Marketing & Sales Operations, IBM from the University of Illinois, and his J.D. from Emory
Law School.
Fishman Marketing, Inc. s 1356 St. Johns Ave s Highland Park, IL 60035 USA s Tel: 847.432.3546 (847-HEADLINE) s ross@fishmanmarketing.com
www.fishmanmarketing.com

Arizona Rules of Professional Conduct

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Arizona Rules of Professional Conduct

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Model Rules of Professional Conduct: Table of Contents

MODEL RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

! Russian Translation (2009)

! Subject Matter Index

Transactions with Persons Other Than Clients

Law Firms and Associations

Information About Legal Services

Maintaining the Integrity of the Profession

(i) the reciprocal referral agreement is not exclusive, and

(2) the solicitation involves coercion, duress or harassment.

Dates of initial adoption

Jurisdiction Date of Adoption

District of Columbia 3/1/90

New Hampshire 1/16/86

New Jersey 7/12/84

New Mexico 6/26/86

New York 12/16/08

North Carolina 10/7/85

North Dakota 5/6/87

Rhode Island 11/1/88

South Carolina 1/9/90

South Dakota 12/15/87

Virgin Islands 1/28/91

West Virginia 6/30/88

Order entered July 1, 2009.

ARTICLE VIII. ILLINOIS RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

Adopted July 1, 2009, effective January 1, 2010.

Adopted July 1, 2009, effective January 1, 2010.

Adopted July 1, 2009, effective January 1, 2010.

Adopted July 1, 2009, effective January 1, 2010.

Adopted July 1, 2009, effective January 1, 2010.

Adopted July 1, 2009, effective January 1, 2010.

Adopted July 1, 2009, effective January 1, 2010.

Adopted July 1, 2009, effective January 1, 2010.

Adopted July 1, 2009, effective January 1, 2010.

Adopted July 1, 2009, effective January 1, 2010.

RULE 7.6: RESERVED

(1) contains statements or claims that are false, deceptive or misleading; or

(2) violates a Rule.

(c) An advertisement shall not:

(6) be made to resemble legal documents; or

(1) its dissemination does not violate paragraph (a);

(3) it is accompanied by the following disclaimer: “Prior results do not guarantee a

(f ) Every advertisement other than those appearing in a radio, television or billboard

(g) A lawyer or law firm shall not utilize:

(1) a pop-up or pop-under advertisement in connection with computer-accessed

RULE 7.2: Payment for Referrals

(1) a legal aid office or public defender office:

(i) operated or sponsored by a duly accredited law school;

(ii) operated or sponsored by a bona fide, non-profit community organization;

(iii) operated or sponsored by a governmental agency; or

(iv) operated, sponsored, or approved by a bar association;

(2) a military legal assistance office;

(3) a lawyer referral service operated, sponsored or approved by a bar association or

RULE 7.3: Solicitation and Recommendation of Professional Employment

(a) A lawyer shall not engage in solicitation:

(1) by in-person or telephone contact, or by realtime or interactive computer-accessed

(2) by any form of communication if:

(iii) the solicitation involves coercion, duress or harassment;

(i) a copy of the solicitation;

(iii) if the solicitation is in a language other than English, an accurate English-language

(2) Such solicitation shall contain no reference to the fact of filing.

(3) If a solicitation is directed to a predetermined recipient, a list containing the names