Can a lawyer run a pay-per-minute '900 number' service giving legal advice by phone, advertise it on the radio, and refer callers to other firms?

Plain-English summary

A lawyer proposed a service in which New York-admitted lawyers would give legal advice to callers on a "900 number" billed by the phone company at $3 per minute, advertised on the radio, with calls referred to other firms where the answering lawyer lacked expertise. The committee assumed the service complied with the federal 900-number statute and did not involve fee splitting with the phone company (DR 3-102(A)) or unauthorized practice in other states (DR 3-101(B)), and answered the question yes, subject to several conditions.

On giving advice by phone, the committee held competence (DR 6-101(A); EC 6-1) requires the service to have competent lawyers for every advertised area, and that it will often be inappropriate to give more than general advice in a single call, because competent work may require a conflicts check, research, and document review. A lawyer giving advice in one call should therefore disclose the extent of the advice and the attorney-client relationship: whether the advice is general or tailored, what arrangements exist if fuller work is needed, and whether the representation is limited to the call. The committee tied this to its limited-scope precedent (N.Y. State 604 (1989)), allowing a lawyer to limit the representation to general advice with full disclosure to the caller.

On referrals, the committee noted that because the firm was not paying or receiving a referral fee, DR 2-103(C) and DR 2-107(A) did not technically apply, but flagged two concerns if many cases would be referred: the advertising-identification requirement (DR 2-101(K)) and the need to disclose whether callers are charged for the discussion leading up to a referral. It observed that for-profit lawyer referral and fact-finding-for-referral raise public-policy questions, since no governmental or bar standards govern for-profit referral services.

On fees, the committee said DR 2-106 bars an unreasonable fee, and that with a 900 number time is the only billing factor; whether $180 per hour is reasonable depends on community standards and whether the service provides individualized advice or pre-prepared educational material. On advertising, radio ads are permitted if not false or misleading (DR 2-101(A)), but must be prerecorded, approved by the lawyer, and retained (DR 2-101(F)).

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1994, under New York's former Code of Professional Responsibility, which New York replaced with the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2009. The advertising rules in particular have been substantially revised since. 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 charge for legal advice given over a 900 number?

A: Under this opinion, yes, if the fee is reasonable under DR 2-106. The committee noted that time is the only billing factor on a 900 number and left the reasonableness of $180 per hour to community standards and the nature of the advice.

Q: What must the lawyer disclose to a 900-number caller?

A: The lawyer should disclose the extent of the advice and any attorney-client relationship: whether the advice is general or tailored, what happens if fuller work is needed, and whether the representation is limited to the phone call.

Q: Can the service refer callers to other firms?

A: Yes. Because no referral fee was involved, the fee-division rules did not technically apply, but the committee flagged the advertising-identification requirement and the need to disclose whether callers are charged for the pre-referral discussion.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interpreted New York's former Code: the advertising provisions DR 2-101 (including subsections on radio ads and identification), the solicitation/referral rule DR 2-103(C), the fee-division rule DR 2-107(A), the reasonable-fee rule DR 2-106, and the competence rules DR 6-101(A) and EC 6-1, along with EC 2-2 and EC 2-5 on public legal education. The closest Model Rule analogues are Rule 7.1 (communications about services), Rule 7.2 (referrals), Rule 1.2 (scope of representation, including limited scope), Rule 1.5 (fees), and Rule 1.1 (competence). New York replaced the Code with the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2009; the provisions cited here are historical.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.1 (communications about a lawyer's services)
• MR 7.2 (referrals and advertising)
• MR 1.2 (scope of representation; limited-scope)
• MR 1.5 (fees)
• MR 1.1 (competence)
• NY EC 2-2; EC 2-5; DR 2-101; DR 2-103(C); DR 2-106; DR 2-107(A); DR 6-101(A)

Other opinions cited:

• N.Y. State 625 (1992): recorded general legal information on a 900 number
• N.Y. State 597 (1989): group advertisement with telephone response
• N.Y. State 604 (1989): limiting the scope of representation with disclosure

See also

• NY State Bar Op. 661: Dramatized and fictional client testimonials in ads
• NY State Bar Op. 771: Website testimonials and past-results advertising
• NY State Bar Op. 1215: Limited-scope pretrial-only criminal representation
• NY State Bar Op. 739: Lawyer referral service fees in domestic relations

Source

• Landing page: https://nysba.org/opinion-664/