Can an Ohio lawyer charge for a public legal seminar, accept clients who come from it, and do the same on a radio talk show?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1994. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct, with citations.
Plain-English summary
The Board answered five questions about public legal seminars and educational radio talk shows, building on its earlier Opinion 87-007. It framed the analysis around Canon 2 and EC 2-1 and EC 2-2, which encourage lawyers to educate the public but caution that such programs should be motivated by public benefit rather than personal publicity or employment.
On seminars, the Board concluded a lawyer may charge an attendance fee, but advised that any fee should be nominal because EC 2-2 makes public benefit the primary aspiration. A lawyer may accept employment that results from a seminar so long as the seminar does not highlight the lawyer's professional experience beyond what DR 2-101 and DR 2-105 allow, the lawyer does not give individual advice, and there is no in-person solicitation under DR 2-101(F)(1); the lawyer may state general availability but may not tell a specific attendee to seek the lawyer's counsel. A lawyer may send letters to businesses and civic groups announcing availability to speak, subject to DR 2-101 and the targeted-direct-mail limits of DR 2-101(F)(2).
On co-sponsorship, the Board concluded a lawyer may speak at seminars sponsored by non-lawyers but discouraged co-sponsorship with non-lawyers because it can create an appearance of an improper relationship or implicate DR 2-103 and the unauthorized practice concerns of DR 3-102; whether a particular co-sponsorship is proper depends on the facts, and a nominal attendance fee (not a legal fee) may be divided with a co-sponsor. On radio, the Board concluded the same seminar standards apply, with added caution about live call-in formats, individual advice, trial publicity under DR 7-107, and protecting client confidences.
Currency note
The Ohio Board flags this opinion as a "CPR Opinion" interpreting the former Ohio Code of Professional Responsibility, which was superseded by the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct effective February 1, 2007. The Board also notes the opinion is "Not current" because of subsequent rule amendments to DR 2-104, effective December 1, 1995, and DR 2-103, effective July 1, 1996.
This opinion issued in 1994. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. The advertising and solicitation rules have changed substantially since 1994. Verify against the current Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct before relying on any specific rule mentioned here.
Common questions
Q: Could a lawyer charge admission to a public legal seminar?
A: Yes. The Board concluded no rule prohibits charging an attendance fee, but advised that the fee should be nominal because EC 2-2 makes benefiting the public, not the lawyer, the primary purpose.
Q: Could a lawyer take on clients who came from a seminar or radio show?
A: Yes. The Board concluded a lawyer may accept resulting employment so long as the program does not emphasize the lawyer's professional experience beyond DR 2-101 and DR 2-105, the lawyer does not give individual advice, and the lawyer does not tell specific attendees or listeners to seek the lawyer's counsel.
Q: Could a lawyer co-sponsor a seminar with a non-lawyer?
A: The Board did not treat it as per se improper but discouraged it, concluding co-sponsorship may create an appearance of an improper lawyer/non-lawyer relationship; whether it is proper depends on the facts, and a divided fee must be a nominal attendance fee, not a legal fee.
Q: Could a lawyer host a call-in legal radio show?
A: Yes, under the same standards as a seminar, but the Board cautioned that live call-in formats require special care not to give individual advice, not to violate trial-publicity rule DR 7-107, and not to disclose confidences.
Background and rules framework
The opinion interprets the former Ohio Code of Professional Responsibility advertising and solicitation framework: DR 2-101 (publicity, including DR 2-101(F)(1) on in-person solicitation and DR 2-101(F)(2) on targeted direct mail), DR 2-103 (recommendation of employment), DR 2-104 (suggestion of need of legal services), and DR 2-105 (limitation of practice), with reference to DR 3-102 (unauthorized practice), DR 7-107 (trial publicity), and the aspirations of EC 2-1 and EC 2-2.
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- Former Ohio Code of Professional Responsibility DR 2-101, DR 2-103, DR 2-104, DR 2-105, DR 3-102, DR 7-107; EC 2-1, EC 2-2
Other opinions cited:
- Ohio BPC Op. 87-007 (1987); Ohio State Bar Ass'n Informal Op. 94-2 (1994)
- Bar Ass'n of Nassau County Op. 87-25; Iowa State Bar Ops. 89-5, 89-41, 91-16, 93-8; State Bar of Michigan Op. RI-99; Pennsylvania Bar Ass'n Ops. 89-32, 93-216; Virginia State Bar Op. 856; Mississippi State Bar Op. 156
See also
- Ohio BPC Op. 1987-007: Legal Seminars, Advertising and Conduct
- Ohio BPC Op. 1992-012: Lawyer-Farmer Advertising in a Trade Magazine
- Ohio BPC Op. 1989-024: Client Testimonials in Advertising
Source
- Landing page: https://ohioadvop.org/advisory-opinion-index/
- Original PDF: https://www.ohioadvop.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Op-94-013.pdf
Original opinion text
Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.
The Supreme Court of Ohio
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES AND DISCIPLINE
41 SOUTH HIGH STREET-SUITE 3370, COLUMBUS, OH 43215-6105
(614) 644-5800 FAX: (614) 644-5804
OFFICE OF SECRETARY
OPINION 94-13
Issued December 2, 1994
[CPR Opinion-provides advice under the Ohio Code of Professional Responsibility which is superseded by the Ohio
Rules of Professional Conduct, eff. 2/1/2007.]
[Not current-subsequent rule amendments to DR 2-104, eff. Dec. 1, 1995; DR 2-103, eff. Jul. 1, 1996.]
SYLLABUS: A lawyer who conducts a legal seminar for the public may charge an attendance fee.
However, if a fee is charged it should be nominal since the aspirational goal within EC 2-2 of the
Ohio Code of Professional Responsibility suggests that the primary motivation for conducting legal
seminars should be to benefit the public rather than to benefit the lawyer.
A lawyer who conducts a legal seminar for the public may accept legal employment that results
from the activity, provided the seminar does not highlight the lawyer's professional experience
beyond what is permitted in DR 2-101 and DR 2-105, the lawyer does not undertake to give
individual advice, and the lawyer does not engage in improper solicitation. A lawyer may make a
general statement to attendees regarding availability, telephone number, address, and whether the
lawyer routinely provides free initial consultation. A lawyer may not make a specific statement to
any attendee that the attendee should seek the attorney's counsel. If a lawyer recognizes that an
attendee may have legal problems or is unaware of his or her legal rights or obligations, the lawyer
may suggest that the attendee seek counsel of the attendee's choice.
A lawyer who conducts a legal seminar for the public may send a letter to businesses, civic or
charitable organizations, and other groups to inform them of the lawyer's availability to provide
public speaking.
A lawyer may speak on legal topics at seminars sponsored by non-lawyers. However, co-
sponsorship of seminars with non-lawyers is not encouraged, since it may create an appearance of
an improper relationship between a lawyer and a non-lawyer. Nevertheless, the determination of
whether co-sponsorship of a seminar between a lawyer and a non-lawyer would be proper depends
upon the facts and circumstances of the relationship between the co-sponsors. If a co-sponsorship
is ethically undertaken, a nominal attendance fee could be divided between co-sponsors.
A lawyer may participate in a radio talk show to educate the public regarding legal issues and may
accept legal employment that results from the activity, so long as the radio talk show does not
highlight the lawyer's professional experience beyond what is permitted in DR 2-101 and DR 2-
105, the lawyer does not undertake to give individual advice, and the lawyer does not engage in
improper solicitation.
Op. 94-13 2
OPINION: This opinion addresses legal seminars, radio talk shows, and the acceptance of legal
business generated from these forms of communications. The questions are set forth below.
Legal Seminars
1. Is it proper for a lawyer who conducts a legal seminar for the public to charge an
attendance fee?
2. Is it proper for a lawyer who conducts a legal seminar for the public to accept
legal employment that results from the activity?
3. Is it proper for a lawyer who conducts a legal seminar for the public to send a
letter to businesses, civic or charitable organizations, or other groups to inform
them of the lawyer's availability to provide public speaking?
4. Is it proper for a lawyer to speak on legal topics at public seminars sponsored or
co-sponsored by someone other than the lawyer?
Radio Talk Shows
1. Is it proper for a lawyer to participate in a radio talk show to educate the public
regarding legal issues and to accept legal employment that results from the
activity?
Introduction
Canon 2 of the Ohio Code of Code of Professional Responsibility broadly states that "A Lawyer
Should Assist the Legal Profession in Fulfilling Its Duty to Make Legal Counsel Available."
Ethical Consideration 2-1 reminds lawyers that educating the public to recognize their legal
problems is an important function of the legal profession.
EC 2-1
The need of members of the public for legal services is met only if they recognize
their legal problems, appreciate the importance of seeking assistance, and are able to
obtain the services of acceptable legal counsel. Hence, important functions of the
legal profession are to educate laymen to recognize their legal problems, to
facilitate the process of intelligent selection of lawyers, and to assist in making legal
services fully available. (Emphasis added).
Op. 94-13 3
Ethical Consideration 2-2 expressly identifies seminar participation as a permissible activity for
lawyers.
EC 2-2
The legal profession should assist laymen to recognize legal problems because such
problems may not be self-revealing and often are not timely noticed. Therefore,
lawyers acting under proper auspices should encourage and participate in
educational and public relations programs concerning our legal system with
particular reference to legal problems that frequently arise. Such educational
programs should be motivated by a desire to benefit the public rather than to obtain
publicity or employment for particular lawyers. Examples of permissible activities
include preparation of institutional advertisements and professional articles for
lay publications and participation in seminars, lectures, and civic programs.
But a lawyer who participates in such activities should shun personal publicity.
(Emphasis added).
A lawyer who conducts a legal seminar must be familiar with these ethical considerations as well as
the Code's rules governing publicity, DR 2-101; professional notices, DR 2-102; recommendation
of professional employment, DR 2-103; suggestion of need for legal services, DR 2-104; and
limitation of practice, DR 2-105.
Seven years ago, the Board issued Opinion 87-007 (1987) addressing advertising and conducting of
legal seminars. The syllabus broadly stated that "[a] lawyer or law firm may ethically advertise and
conduct a legal seminar." See Ohio SupCt, Bd of Comm’rs on Grievances and Discipline, Op. 87-
007 (1987) advising that
a lawyer or law firm may ethically promote a legal seminar through printed
advertising provided the advertisement does not contain false, fraudulent,
misleading or deceptive statements or claims. Furthermore, a lawyer or law firm
may ethically conduct a legal seminar provided the lawyer does not tout or
recommend himself [herself] or his [her] law firm for employment to those attending
the seminar. In other words, the seminar should not be used as a forum for
solicitation or client development.
In this opinion, the Board is asked for further guidance on ethical issues evolving in the area of
legal seminars and to advise upon participation in radio talk shows to educate the public regarding
legal issues.
Op. 94-13 4
Part 1: Legal Seminars
Question One
Is it proper for a lawyer who conducts a legal seminar for the public to charge an
attendance fee?
There is no rule within the Ohio Code of Professional Responsibility prohibiting a lawyer from
charging the public a fee to attend a legal seminar. Elsewhere, lawyers have been permitted to
offer legal seminars for a fee. See e.g., Bar Ass'n of Nassau County, Op. 87-25 (1987). This Board
agrees that a lawyer who conducts a legal seminar for the public may charge an attendance fee.
Yet, EC 2-2 reminds Ohio lawyers that “[s]uch educational programs should be motivated by a
desire to benefit the public rather than to obtain publicity or employment for particular lawyers."
By charging the public a fee to attend legal seminars, a lawyer's motivation may appear to be
pecuniary rather than for the benefit of the public. Thus, the Board advises that if a fee is charged,
it should be nominal since the aspirational goal within EC 2-2 of the Code suggests the primary
motivation for conducting legal seminars should be to benefit the public rather than the lawyer.
Question Two
Is it proper for a lawyer who conducts a legal seminar for the public to accept legal
employment that results from the activity?
Although the primary purpose of lawyers conducting legal seminars is to educate the public, a
secondary effect is that publicity is generated and employment opportunities arise. Several rules
within the Code provide guidance in determining whether a lawyer may ethically accept
employment that results from a lawyer's participation in a legal seminar.
Disciplinary Rule 2-101(F) (1) states that "a lawyer shall not make any solicitation of legal business
in person or by telephone, except as provided in DR 2-103 and DR 2-104.” Since seminar
participation puts attorneys in face to face contact with individuals, there must be no in-person
solicitation.
Disciplinary Rule 2-104(A) (4) provides that a lawyer may speak publicly without affecting his or
her right to accept employment.
Op. 94-13 5
DR 2-104. SUGGESTION OF NEED OF LEGAL SERVICES
(A) A lawyer who has given unsolicited advice to a layman that he [she] should
obtain counsel or take legal action shall not accept employment resulting from that
advice, except that: [exceptions (1), (3) and (5) omitted]
(2) A lawyer may accept employment that results from his [her]
participation in activities designed to educate laymen to recognize
legal problems, to make intelligent selection of counsel, or to utilize
available legal services if such activities are conducted or sponsored
by any of the offices or organizations enumerated in DR 2-103 (D)
(1) through (5) [sic], to the extent and under the conditions prescribed
therein.
(4) Without affecting his [her] right to accept employment, a lawyer
may speak publicly or write for publication on legal topics so long as
he [she] does not emphasize his [her] own professional experience or
reputation and does not undertake to give individual advice.
Read together, these rules permit a lawyer to ethically accept legal employment that secondarily
results from a legal seminar so long as the seminar does not highlight the lawyer's professional
experience beyond what is permitted in DR 2-101 and DR 2-105, the lawyer does not engage in in-
person solicitation, and the lawyer does not undertake to give individual advice.
To avoid giving individual advice, it would be prudent for the lawyer to advise the attendees that
the lawyer's discussion in regard to questions will be general and not intended as individual advice
for specific problems. In addition, it may be helpful for the attorney to remind the attendees not to
divulge confidential information.
To avoid improper solicitation, a lawyer conducting or speaking at a legal seminar must refrain
from making statements or suggestions that the seminar attendees should seek the attorney's
counsel. However, the attorney may make a general statement to the attendees regarding his or her
availability, including his or her telephone number, address, and whether the lawyer provides free
initial consultation.
Op. 94-13 6
As example, at a seminar an attendee might approach the lawyer conducting a seminar and ask
whether or not to obtain legal counsel. If the lawyer recognizes that the attendee may have a legal
problem or that the attendee is unaware of his or her legal rights or obligations, the lawyer may
properly suggest that the attendee seek legal counsel of the attendee's choice. The lawyer may also
inform the attendee that his or her office provides such legal services, if this is a factual statement.
Another example is that an attendee might approach a lawyer conducting a seminar and directly
request the lawyer's legal services. Provided that the lawyer has not made specific statements to the
attendees that they should seek his or her counsel, the lawyer may accept employment from that
attendee. Ultimately, the decision as to seeking counsel must always be left to the attendee.
In this Board's view a lawyer who complies with the above guidelines and the above cited
provisions of the Code, may ethically accept employment that results from legal seminars. This
view compliments past Opinion 87-007 (1987) and is in line with ethics opinions issued by other
states. See e.g., Mississippi State Bar, Op. 156 (1988) (a lawyer may participate in and accept
employment generated from a legal seminar, provided the seminar complies with advertising rules
and the lawyer does not directly solicit business at the seminar); Pennsylvania Bar Association,
Opinion 89-32 (undated) (a lawyer may speak to a group and may accept representation if initiated
by a person within the group); Virginia State Bar, Op. 856 (1986) (a lawyer may offer free estate
planning seminars to congregants at local churches and accept representation from those who
request the attorney's employment, provided that the seminar and its advertisement are not
misleading or false and the lawyer does not imply that the seminars are endorsed by the churches).
In summary, this Board concludes that a lawyer who conducts a legal seminar may accept legal
employment that results from the activity, provided the seminar does not highlight the lawyer's
professional experience beyond what is permitted in DR 2-101 and DR 2-105, the lawyer does not
undertake to give individual advice, and the lawyer does not engage in improper solicitation. A
lawyer may make a general statement to attendees regarding availability, telephone number,
address, and whether the lawyer routinely provides free initial consultation. A lawyer may not
make a specific statement to any attendee that the attendee should seek the attorney's counsel. If a
lawyer recognizes that an attendee may have legal problems or is unaware of his or her legal rights
or obligations, the lawyer may suggest that the attendee seek counsel of the attendee's choice.
Op. 94-13 7
Question Three
Is it proper for a lawyer to send a letter to businesses, civic or charitable
organizations, and other groups to inform them of the lawyer's availability to
provide public speaking?
Letters announcing availability to conduct legal seminars are consistent with the aspirational goals
within EC 2-1 and 2-2 of furthering the profession's important function of educating the public on
various legal topics. However, such letters are a form of communication subject to the restrictions
within the publicity rule, DR 2-101.
Several states have found it proper for a lawyer to advertise a legal seminar to the public through
the mail. See, e.g., Bar Ass'n of Nassau County, Op. 87-25 (1987); Iowa State Bar Ass'n, Op. 89-5
(1989). Some states require advertising disclaimers on the mailings. See, e.g., Iowa State Bar
Ass’n, Op. 89-41 (1990); Alabama State Bar, Op. 86-49 (1986). Other states do not require
disclaimers. See e.g., State Bar of Arizona, Op. 88-7 (1988). One state advised that invitations to a
seminar on automobile accident claims may be mailed to randomly selected members of the public,
but may not be targeted to specifically selected individuals. See, North Carolina Bar Ass'n, Op. 36
(1988).
In Ohio, DR 2-101(F) (2) permits, but places restrictions upon, targeted direct mailings to "persons
or groups of persons who may be in need of specific legal service by reason of a circumstance,
condition, or occurrence that is known or, upon reasonable inquiry, could be known to the soliciting
lawyer or law firm." For a review of the restrictions, see DR 2-101(F) (2). Generally speaking,
letters announcing availability to do public speaking would not be considered a targeted direct mail
solicitation subject to the restrictions within DR 2-101(F) (2). However, if the letters are targeted
to "persons or groups of persons who may be in need of specific legal service by reason of a
circumstance, condition, or occurrence that is known or, upon reasonable inquiry, could be known
to the soliciting lawyer or law firm," the lawyer must comply with the restrictions set forth in DR 2-
101 (F) (2) (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e). As a caveat, a lawyer may not attempt to circumvent the
Code's restrictions regarding direct mail solicitation to targeted groups through the pretext of
offering a legal seminar.
Under DR 2-101 (B) (3) (1993) “[b]rochures or pamphlets containing biographical and
informational data that is acceptable under these rules may be disseminated directly to clients,
members of the bar, or others." Thus, in this Board's view, an attorney may include an
informational brochure to
Op. 94-13 8
accompany a letter announcing availability to provide public speaking, provided that the brochure
complies with DR 2-101.
In conclusion, the Board advises that a lawyer may send a letter to businesses, civic or charitable
organizations, and other groups to inform them of the lawyer's availability to provide public
speaking.
Question Four
Is it proper for a lawyer to speak on legal topics at a public seminar sponsored by a
non-lawyer or for a lawyer to co-sponsor a seminar with a non-lawyer?
There is no specific rule within the Code that would prohibit a lawyer from serving as a speaker on
legal topics at a public seminar sponsored by a non-lawyer. Participation in educational seminars
sponsored by others is consistent with the aspirational goals within the Code since the lawyer is
enhancing the community's awareness on various legal topics. See EC 2-2, "lawyers acting under
proper auspices should encourage and participate in educational and public relations programs
concerning our legal system with particular reference to legal problems that frequently arise."
Further, under DR 2-104 (A) (2) attorneys have been given explicit permission to participate in and
accept employment resulting from educational activities conducted or sponsored by any of the
offices or organizations enumerated in DR 2-101 (D) (1) through (4), namely, a legal aid or public
defender office; a military legal assistance office, a lawyer referral service operated, sponsored, or
approved by a bar association; or any bona fide organization meeting the requirements within the
rule. The Board does not interpret that language as to exclude an attorney from participating in a
public seminar sponsored by others. Particularly since DR 2-104 (A) (4) broadly permits attorneys
to accept employment resulting from public speaking: "[w]ithout affecting his [her] right to accept
employment, a lawyer may speak publicly or write for publication on legal topics so long as he
[she] does not emphasize his [her] own professional experience or reputation and does not
undertake to give individual advice.
Nevertheless, participation in seminars sponsored by non-lawyers should not be used as a vehicle
for circumventing DR 2-103, the rule prohibiting improper recommendation of professional
employment.
DR 2-103
(A) A lawyer shall not recommend employment, as a private practitioner, of himself
[herself], his [her] partner, or associate to a non-lawyer who has not sought his [her]
advice regarding employment of a lawyer, except as provided in DR 2-101.
Op. 94-13 9
(B) A lawyer shall not compensate or give any thing of value to a person or
organization to recommend or secure his [her] employment by a client, or as a
reward for having made a recommendation resulting in his [her] employment by a
client, except that he [she] may pay the usual and reasonable fees or dues charged by
any of the organizations listed in DR 2-103 (D).
(C) A lawyer shall not request a person or organization to recommend or promote
the use of his [her] services or those of his [her] partner or associate, or any other
lawyer affiliated with him [her] or his [her] firm, as a private practitioner, except
that [exceptions for bar association lawyer referral services and bona fide
organizations as defined by DR 2-103(D)].
Also, participation in seminars conducted by non-attorneys should not be used as a method to assist
a non-attorney in the unauthorized practice of law which is prohibited by DR 3-102. See e.g., Ohio
State Bar Ass'n, Informal Op. 94-2 (1994) (addressing participation in living trust seminars
sponsored by outside organization and solicitation of fee generating legal business at such
seminars).
Co-sponsorship of seminars with non-attorneys magnifies these ethical concerns. Some co-
sponsorships clearly would be improper. For example, a co-sponsorship with a non-lawyer whose
purpose was to procure legal work or financial benefit for the lawyer would violate DR 2-103 (C).
Other co-sponsorships may create an appearance of an improper relationship between a lawyer and
a non-lawyer. For example, even though co-sponsors may not intend to recommend each other's
services or procure employment for each other, the co-sponsorship itself may create such
appearance. Yet, despite ethical concerns, co-sponsorships have not been considered per se
improper. See e.g., State Bar of Michigan, Op. RI-99, (1991) (permitting law firm co-sponsorship
with a local hospital); Iowa State Bar Ass'n, Op. 91-16 (1991) (permitting lawyers and other
professionals to be listed as sponsors for a seminar on estate planning); Pennsylvania Bar Ass'n,
Op. 93-216 (1994) (permitting lawyer and an outreach organization to co-sponsor a community-
based seminar on toxic tort hazards).
In this Board's view a lawyer may speak on legal topics at seminars sponsored by non-lawyers.
However, co-sponsorship of seminars with non-lawyers is not encouraged, since it may create an
appearance of an improper relationship between a lawyer and a non-lawyer. Nevertheless, the
determination of whether co-sponsorship of a seminar between a lawyer and a non-lawyer would be
proper depends upon the facts and
Op. 94-13 10
circumstances of the relationship between the co-sponsors. A bright line cannot be drawn within
this opinion. If a co-sponsorship is ethically undertaken, a nominal attendance fee could be divided
between co-sponsors. A nominal attendance fee would not be considered a legal fee. Therefore,
division of a nominal attendance fee with a co-sponsor would not be a prohibited division of a fee
with a non-lawyer under DR 3-102.
Part II: Radio Talk Shows
Question One
Is it proper for a lawyer to participate in a radio talk show to educate the public
regarding legal issues and to accept legal employment that results from the activity?
Radio is mentioned within the Code as a permitted form of communication for advertising legal
services. See Code of Professional Responsibility, DR 2-101 (B) (1). There is nothing within the
Code to suggest that the radio would be an improper format for educating the public regarding legal
issues.
An attorney who uses an educational radio show as a form of educational seminar must abide by
the same guidelines set forth above for legal seminars. However, since radio talk shows often
utilize a format where listeners are invited to comment or ask questions, particular caution is
warranted. For example, a lawyer participating in this type of radio show must be extremely
careful not to impart individual advice. See e.g., Colorado Bar Ass’n, Op. 83 (undated) South
Carolina Bar, Op. 86-4 (undated). In addition, attorneys participating in or associated with pending
civil or criminal matters must be careful not to make statements prohibited under the trial publicity
rule, DR 7-107. Finally, confidences and secrets should not be divulged over the radio. Concerns
regarding violation of confidences and secrets and establishment of an attorney-client relationship
were among the reasons why one state advised that a law firm may not sponsor a radio call-in show
where the public's legal questions would be answered or referred to a bar association. See Iowa
State Bar Ass'n, Op 93-8 (1993).
Op. 94-13 11
It is this Board's view that these concerns can be safeguarded. As with legal seminars, it may be
prudent for a lawyer to advise a radio audience that discussion in regard to questions will be
general and not intended as individual advice for specific problems. In addition, it may be helpful
for the attorney to remind the radio audience not to divulge confidences. As with other types of
legal seminars there should be no improper solicitation. The lawyer may make a general statement
to listeners regarding his or her availability, including his or her telephone number, address, and
whether the lawyer routinely provides free initial consultation. The lawyer may not make a specific
statement to any listener that the listener should seek the lawyer's counsel. If the lawyer recognizes
that a listener may have legal problems or is unaware of his or her legal rights or obligations, the
lawyer may properly suggest that the listener seek counsel of the listener's choice. See discussion
in Part One of this opinion.
In conclusion, this Board advises that a lawyer may participate in a radio talk show to educate the
public regarding legal issues and may accept legal employment that results from the participation,
so long as the radio talk show does not highlight the lawyer's professional experience beyond what
is permitted in DR 2-101 and DR 2-105, the lawyer does not undertake to give individual advice,
and the lawyer does not engage in improper solicitation.
Advisory Opinions of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and Discipline are
informal, nonbinding opinions in response to prospective or hypothetical questions regarding
the application of the Supreme Court Rules for the Government of the Bar of Ohio, the
Supreme Court Rules for the Government of the Judiciary, the Code of Professional
Responsibility, the Code of Judicial Conduct, and the Attorney's Oath of Office.
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 1994 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.