Can a lawyer cold-call companies, or have a company's bank or accountant set up a pitch meeting, to solicit the company's legal business?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry posed three questions about how a firm could pursue corporate clients. First, whether a lawyer could call someone at a company's bank or accounting firm and ask that institution to set up a meeting with a company the lawyer had no prior relationship with, to solicit the company's business. Second, whether a lawyer could use "cold calls" to get a company to hire the firm. Third, what a lawyer could say to a potential client, once such a meeting was arranged, about the company's current firm being too small, lacking expertise, or charging more.

The opinion concluded that the first two practices are prohibited. Rule 2.4(a) bars a lawyer from soliciting professional employment from a prospective client with no family or prior professional relationship where a significant motive is the lawyer's pecuniary gain; approaching the prospective client's bank or accountant first does not insulate the solicitation, and cold calls directly violate Rule 2.4(a). On the third question, the opinion concluded that if the meeting was arranged by those prohibited methods the lawyer is already engaged in prohibited solicitation; but assuming a permissible meeting (for example, where the client sought out the lawyer), Rule 2.1(c) restricts comparisons of the lawyer's services with other lawyers' to comparisons that can be factually substantiated. The opinion observed it may be difficult to substantiate the listed statements about size and expertise, while a truthful statement that the firm would in fact charge less is permissible if the firm has sufficient knowledge to say so.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1987, before the North Carolina State Bar's adoption of the 2003 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. The provisions it applies (Rule 2.4(a) on solicitation and Rule 2.1(c) on comparative statements in lawyer advertising) have since been renumbered and revised (the corresponding Model Rules are 7.3 and 7.1). Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer cold-call a company to solicit its legal business?

A: No. The opinion concluded that cold calls made to get a company to hire the lawyer directly violate Rule 2.4(a)'s prohibition on solicitation for pecuniary gain absent a family or prior professional relationship.

Q: Does routing the approach through the company's bank or accountant make it permissible?

A: No. The opinion concluded that approaching the prospective client's bank or accounting firm first does not insulate the solicitation from Rule 2.4(a).

Q: In a permissible meeting, can a lawyer say the current firm is too small or charges more?

A: Only if substantiated. The opinion concluded that comparisons of services must be factually substantiated under Rule 2.1(c); statements about size and expertise may be hard to substantiate, while a truthful lower-fee statement is permissible if the lawyer has sufficient knowledge to make it.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied North Carolina Rule 2.4(a) on solicitation of prospective clients for pecuniary gain (corresponding to Model Rule 7.3) and Rule 2.1(c) on comparative statements about a lawyer's services (corresponding to Model Rule 7.1). The analysis turned on whether the contact was a prohibited solicitation regardless of the intermediary, and on whether comparative claims could be factually substantiated.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• North Carolina Rule 2.4(a) (solicitation of professional employment)
• North Carolina Rule 2.1(c) (comparative statements about a lawyer's services)
• MR 7.3 (solicitation of clients); MR 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services)

See also

• NC Ethics Op. RPC 26: newcomer solicitation letters (superseded)
• NC Ethics Op. RPC 43: advertisement of board certification of specialty

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ncbar.gov/for-lawyers/ethics-and-governing-rules/ethics-opinions/opinions/rpc-20/

Original opinion text

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

Inquiry #1:

May an attorney or law firm in North Carolina call someone at a bank or an accounting firm and specifically suggest that the institution set up a meeting between the attorney or the law firm and a company with which that attorney or law firm has had no prior relationship, for the purposes of soliciting the business of the company for the attorney or law firm?

Opinion #1:

No. Rule 2.4(a) specifically prohibits a lawyer from soliciting professional employment from a prospective client where there has been no family or prior professional relationship if a significant motive for the lawyer's doing so is his pecuniary gain. That the attorney or law firm approaches the prospective client's bank or accounting firm first does not insulate the solicitation from the prohibition of Rule 2.4(a).

Inquiry #2:

May an attorney or law firm in North Carolina utilize the technique of "cold calls" in attempting to cause a company to employ that attorney or law firm?

Opinion #2:

No. "Cold calls" made in an attempt to cause a company to employ the attorney or law firm directly violate Rule 2.4(a).

Inquiry #3:

When an attorney or law firm is talking to a potential client, having caused the meeting by one of the above-described methods, and when the potential client is already represented by another attorney or law firm, may the attorney or law firm state or suggest any of the following:

a. That the law firm presently representing the company is inadequate in size or quality to perform services for the company?

b. That the law firm presently representing the company does not have adequate expertise in certain areas that the company may need?

c. That the interviewing law firm would charge less than the present law firm?

Opinion #3:

If an attorney or representatives of a law firm are talking to a potential client after setting up a meeting in one of the above described methods, the attorney or law firm, of course, is engaging in a prohibited solicitation. Assuming that an attorney or law firm were speaking to a potential client under circumstances not necessarily in violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct, such as where the potential client sought out the attorney or law firm, the statements which may ethically be made are restricted by Rule 2.1. In particular, the attorney or law firm discussing possible representation with a potential client already represented by a different attorney or firm is prohibited from making statements which compare that lawyer's services with those of other lawyers unless the comparison can be factually substantiated. Rule 2.1(c). It may be very difficult to substantiate the type of statements listed above as a small firm may be able to provide services by concentration of their time upon the needs of the particular client and may be able to develop expertise as needed. If the interviewing law firm would in fact charge less than the present law firm, it would not be unethical to say so provided that the interviewing law firm has sufficient knowledge to say so.