| LEO Num | Topics | Summary | Date |
1380
 Print
|
| [WITHDRAWN 9/16] Although the Bar cannot determine if two affiliated professional corporations are a single entity for purposes of the ethics rules, a determination that they are two separate entities might mean that they are violating: the fee-splitting rules; the prohibition on paying compensation to recommend employment; the ban on using the name of a lawyer who has left the firm and is engaged in business elsewhere. | 11/30/1990 |
0821
Print
|
| [WITHDRAWN 9/16] Lawyers who are not acting as partners may not circulate publications that imply a partnership arrangement, and may not pay a firm to recommend it in a brochure. | 9/19/1986 |
1676
Print
|
| A collections lawyer may not pay a percentage of the lawyer's fee to a company that offers an electronic communications system to facilitate the collections, because it would amount to impermissible fee-splitting with a non-lawyer. This rule would also apply if the company referred collections clients to the lawyer. | 5/16/1996 |
1750
Print
|
| A compendium opinion on lawyer marketing reflects the 7/1/17 ethics rules changes. First, lawyers must disclose that their advertising includes actors rather than lawyers "when the language used implies otherwise" (as when actors "use first person references to themselves as lawyers"). Second, lawyers may use a phrase such as "no recovery, no fee" only when they have already decided that the "client's responsibility for advanced costs and expenses will be contingent on the outcome of the matter." Third, law firms may not include the name of a lawyer "not associated with the firm or a predecessor of the firm," and must "actually practice" under their advertised name. It is "potentially misleading" for lawyers to advertise "the use of a non-exclusive office space" if lawyers do not provide legal services there. Fourth, lawyers may not advertise that would-be clients "will have to consult an attorney" before speaking with an insurance company representative. Fifth, lawyers may advertise their participation in lawyer referral services, as long as the service is: "operated in the public interest; is open to all area lawyers who meet the services requirements; requires service members to pay malpractice insurance or otherwise ensure financial responsibility; has adopted procedures for admitting and removing lawyers; prohibits any fee-generated referral to any lawyers who have an ownership interest in the service. Among other things, such referral service membership advertising may not: falsely imply that membership is based on some objective "quality of services" assessment; state or imply that the services contain all eligible lawyers; falsely state or imply that a "substantial number" of lawyers participate in the service. Sixth, although advertising specific or cumulative case results no longer must be preceded by a specific disclaimer, such advertisements "can be misleading." For instance, it would be misleading to advertise a $1,000,000 verdict if the lawyer's client had turned down a $2,000,000 settlement offer before trial. Seventh, lawyers may not use such "extravagant or self-laudatory" advertisements such as "the best lawyers," "the most experienced," etc. Eighth, lawyers may not advertise or use client testimonials that cannot be "factually substantiated" – the same standard as the lawyers' own advertisements. Lawyers may use "soft endorsements" that describe lawyers' return of clients' phone calls, appearance of concern, etc. Ninth, lawyers may list their inclusion in publications such as The Best Lawyers In America, but if they are delisted they must accurately state the "year(s) or edition(s) in which the lawyer was listed." Tenth, lawyers may advertise as a "specialist" or "specializing in" certain areas, as long as they can establish its accuracy. Eleventh, lawyers may advertise using terms such as "expert" or "expertise" if they can factually substantiate the description. | 10/2/2019 |
1735
Print
|
| A law firm may employ independent contractor lawyers under the following conditions: whether acting as independent contractors, contract attorneys or "of counsel," the lawyers must be treated as part of the law firm for confidentiality and conflicts of interest purposes; the firm must advise clients of any "mark-up" between the amount billed for the independent contractor lawyers' services and the amount paid to them if "the firm bills the amount paid to the Attorney as an out-of-pocket expense or disbursement," but need not make such disclosure to the clients if the firm bills for the lawyers' work "in the same manner as it would for any other associate in the Firm" and the independent contractor lawyer works under another lawyer's "direct supervision" or the firm "adopts the work product as its own;" the independent contractor lawyers may be designated as "of counsel" to the firm if they have a "close, continuing relationship with the Firm and direct contact with the firm and its clients" and avoid holding themselves out as being partners or associates of the firm; the firm must disclose to clients that an independent contractor lawyer is working on the client's matter if the lawyers "will work independently, without close supervision by an attorney associated with the Firm," but need not make such disclosure (and obtain consent)if the "temporary or contract attorney works directly under the supervision of an attorney in the Firm;" the firm may pay a "forwarding" or "referral" fee to the independent contractor lawyers for bringing in a client under the new Rules. | 10/20/1999 |
1632
Print
|
| A law firm may not pay a service fee to a so-called "lender service bureau" in return for obtaining legal work from the bureau. Because the bureau apparently is not engaging in fraud against a tribunal, however, the law firm is not obligated to disclose the bureau's operations to the proper authorities. If the law firm determines that the possible misconduct of lawyers holding an "ownership or management interest" in the bureau meets the proper standards, the misconduct would have to be reported. | 2/7/1995 |
0806
Print
|
| A law firm may pay secretaries a bonus based on the firm's profitability. | 6/25/1986 |
1295
Print
|
| A lawyer may accept clients who contacted the lawyer based on the recommendation of prison inmates, as long as the lawyer has not compensated the inmates or engaged in false advertising. | 11/21/1989 |
1374
Print
|
| A lawyer may accept referrals from a mental health therapist as long as the lawyer maintains total loyalty to the client and does not reveal any client confidences without consent. The lawyer may also leave business cards at the therapist's office as long as they are truthful and the lawyer does not compensate the therapist. | 9/13/1990 |
0875
Print
|
| A lawyer may market a pre-paid legal service plan through non-lawyers who receive commissions for subscribers. | 1/30/1987 |
0387
Print
|
| A lawyer may not discount fees for preparing a will contingent on the client's contributing money to a charity which advertises the lawyer's services. | 9/12/1980 |
1572
Print
|
| A lawyer may not engage in an arrangement with a non-lawyer under which the non-lawyer refers cases to the lawyer, assists in helping the lawyer for a fee and in personal injury cases receives a percentage of the client's recovery. The arrangement impermissibly involves a lawyer: (a) paying the non-lawyer a referral fee for soliciting clients and; (b) splitting fees with a non-lawyer. | 2/8/1994 |
0609
Print
|
| A lawyer may not share fees with a non-lawyer intermediary who recommends the lawyer's employment. | 11/14/1984 |
0984
Print
|
| A lawyer may pay an auto body shop or tow truck operator for a list of their clients so the lawyer may send solicitation letters to them, because the body shop and tow truck operator would not be recommending the lawyer in return for payment. | 10/27/1987 |
0539
Print
|
| A lawyer may represent a party in a real estate settlement upon recommendation of a real estate firm, as long as the client consents to the arrangement and is free to hire any lawyer. [The lawyer would be prohibited from giving the real estate firm anything of value in return for this recommendation.] | 1/18/1984 |
0682
Print
|
| A lawyer must account to a client upon request for any fees paid for future services. | 4/10/1985 |
0207
Print
|
| A lawyer who is referred clients by a developer may not refund to the developer a portion of the lawyer's fee. | 7/28/1970 |
0512
Print
|
| A mediation and counseling service may refer clients to a law firm, but the law firm may not pay a referral fee to the service. | 4/28/1983 |
1073
Print
|
| A real estate developer may advise buyers that it will deduct $500 from closing costs if the buyer uses a designated lawyer, because the offer is not false or misleading. [This arrangement would violate Rule 7.3(a) if the lawyer gives "anything of value" to the developer. Although the Bar did not address this possibility, it seems unlikely that the developer would enter into this arrangement unless it received something in return from the lawyer.] | 6/8/1988 |
1035
Print
|
| An arrangement under which a lawyer would join a trade and barter association would violate the fee-splitting roles if the lawyer shared 10% of the lawyer's fee with the association, because the 10% fee would be seen as compensation for the referral. [Rule 1.5(e) does not require that a lawyer sharing in fees also share responsibility, thus allowing "referral fees" if the client consents after full disclosure.] | 2/19/1988 |
Virginia-1885
Print
|
| Lawyers violate some ethics rules but not other ethics rules if they participate in a for-profit attorney-client matching service ("ACMS") under which the ACMS: advertises "without the lawyers input" fees for limited scope services to be provided by the lawyer; collects the fee, deposit it in the lawyers' operating account after the lawyer completes the work; withdraws a "marketing fee" which is set by the ACMS and based on the legal fee. Such an arrangement: (1) would violate the ethics rules governing limited scope representations, unless the lawyer and the client agree on the limitation rather than simply allowing the ACMS to define the scope in advance; (2) might involve an unreasonable fixed fee, unless the lawyer conducts "an independent assessment" of the advertised fee's relationship to the work; (3) would violate lawyers' ability to safeguard the unearned fixed fee; because the fee initially goes to the ACMS (a lay entity) and not to a trust account, and therefore could be vulnerable to the ACMS's creditors, cannot be refunded if that would be required, etc.; (4) would violate the fee-split rule because there is a "direct linkage" between the lawyer's fee and the ACMS's entitlement to compensation (in contrast to advertising fees which are not based on the legal fee amount); would violate the prohibition on lawyers giving lawyers or nonlawyers "anything of value" to recommend the lawyer (because the ACMS's marketing fee is not a legitimate advertising expense, but instead is "a sum tethered directly to her receipt, and the amount, of a legal fee paid by a client". | 11/8/2018 |