Can a North Carolina lawyer send targeted direct mail without the firm's address, and can the advertising disclaimer be printed in hard-to-read light type?

Plain-English summary

A lawyer sent targeted direct mail letters to people he knew needed legal help in particular matters, on stationery that listed an 800 number but no street address. The opinion addressed whether the address could be omitted, and whether a disclosure statement printed in faint type satisfied the direct mail rule.

On the address, the opinion concluded the omission violates Rule 7.1, which bars false or misleading communications, including a communication that "omits a fact necessary to make a statement considered as a whole not materially misleading" (Rule 7.1(a)). Leaving the address off targeted direct mail is materially misleading because a recipient cannot tell whether the lawyer practices in the recipient's community, elsewhere in North Carolina, or out of state (comparing RPC 217).

On the disclosure statement, the opinion concluded the faint-type version does not comply with Rule 7.3(c). That rule requires the advertising disclosure ("This is an advertisement for legal services") at the beginning of the body of the written communication in print as large or larger than the lawyer's or firm's name. The opinion explained the size and placement are set so recipients have notice the letters are advertisements and may be discarded; that purpose is defeated if the print is so light it cannot be read, so the disclosure must contrast sufficiently with the stationery to be easily read.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1998, before North Carolina's adoption of the 2003 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct, and it cites the advertising and solicitation rules under the numbering then in effect (Rule 7.1(a); Rule 7.3(c)). Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis, including the numbering and content of the direct mail disclosure requirement. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Must a North Carolina lawyer include the firm's address on targeted direct mail?

A: Yes. The opinion concluded omitting the address is materially misleading under Rule 7.1 because the recipient cannot tell where the lawyer practices.

Q: Is an 800 number enough without a street address?

A: No. The opinion concluded a phone number alone does not cure the omission, because it does not tell the recipient whether the lawyer practices in their community or out of state.

Q: Can the "advertisement" disclaimer be printed in light, low-contrast type?

A: No. The opinion concluded the disclosure must be in a shade that contrasts enough with the stationery to be easily read, in print as large or larger than the firm's name and at the beginning of the body, per Rule 7.3(c).

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied North Carolina Rule 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services; false or misleading communications) and Rule 7.3 (direct contact with prospective clients; the targeted-direct-mail disclosure requirement in paragraph (c)), the analogues to Model Rules 7.1 and 7.3, to a lawyer's direct mail solicitation. It compared prior opinion RPC 217.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services) / NC Rule 7.1(a)
• MR 7.3 (solicitation of clients; direct mail) / NC Rule 7.3(c)

Other opinions cited:

• RPC 217: misleading omissions in lawyer communications

See also

• NC State Bar Op. 2000 FEO 6: Implying Early Settlement in a Television Advertisement
• NC State Bar Op. 2000 FEO 1: Advertising a Verdict Record

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ncbar.gov/for-lawyers/ethics-and-governing-rules/ethics-opinions/opinions/97-formal-ethics-opinion-6/

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

Inquiry #1:

Attorney sends targeted direct mail letters to individuals he knows to be in need of legal representation in particular matters. The letterhead on the stationery for the direct mail letters does not include an address for Attorney's law firm although it lists an 800 telephone number. May a lawyer send a targeted direct mail letter to a prospective client on stationery that includes no address for the lawyer or the lawyer's firm?

Opinion #1:

No. Rule 7.1 of the Revised Rules of Professional Conduct prohibits false or misleading communications by a lawyer. Paragraph (a) of that rule defines a false or misleading communication as a communication that "contains a material misrepresentation of fact or law, or omits a fact necessary to make a statement considered as whole not materially misleading." The omission of a lawyer's address from the stationery used for targeted direct mail letters is a material misrepresentation because a recipient of the letter will not be able to determine whether the lawyer practices in the recipient's community, in another community in North Carolina, or out of state. Cf., RPC 217.

Inquiry #2:

Attorney's targeted direct mail letters include the disclosure statement, "This is an advertisement for legal services," which is required by Rule 7.3(c). The print used for the disclosure statement appears to be the same size as the print used for the name of Attorney's law firm. However, the name of Attorney's law firm appears in bold print while the disclosure statement appears in light print that provides little contrast with the color of the stationery. Therefore, the disclosure statement is very difficult to see. Does this stationery comply with the requirements of Revised Rule 7.3(c) regulating targeted direct mail letters?

Opinion #2:

No. The disclosure statement must be in a shade of print that contrasts sufficiently with the stationery to be easily read by a recipient. Revised Rule 7.3(c) requires the advertising disclosure statement "at the beginning of the body of the written communication in print as large or larger than the lawyer's or law firm's name..." The font size and location of the disclosure are dictated by the rule to insure that the recipients of direct mail letters have notice that the letters are advertisements and may be discarded. This purpose is defeated if the shade of the print is so light that the disclaimer cannot be read.