I want to set up a neutral arbitration and mediation practice and advertise that my practice is 'limited to' that work. Is that brochure language proper, and can I identify myself as an attorney?

Plain-English summary

An attorney planning to establish a neutral practice as an attorney-arbitrator asked the panel about a brochure describing his services. The brochure identified him as an "attorney at law," described his practice as "limited to providing impartial mediation [and] arbitration," and listed one- or two-word descriptions of disputes potentially suited to arbitration or mediation.

The panel found no violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility simply because the attorney was limiting his practice to neutral dispute resolution services. It advised that identifying himself as an attorney in the brochure was proper, so long as he did not form an association with a non-attorney to jointly provide dispute resolution services. The panel cautioned, however, that although the phrase "practice limited to" was then permissible, it would cease to be permissible if the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted Model Rule 7.4 of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct and its comment. The panel declined to edit the brochure itself, stating it could not pass on the accuracy of any statistics cited or on whether the listed dispute types would actually lend themselves to arbitration or mediation.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1988, before the Rhode Island Supreme Court's adoption of the 2007 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. The opinion itself flagged that its "practice limited to" holding was contingent on Rhode Island not yet having adopted Model Rule 7.4; Rhode Island's later adoption of the Rules of Professional Conduct means this caution should be treated as historical context, not current guidance.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 I describe my arbitration and mediation practice as "limited to" that work in a brochure?

A: At the time of this 1988 opinion, yes. The panel found the phrase permissible under the Code of Professional Responsibility then in effect, but warned it would not remain permissible once Rhode Island adopted Model Rule 7.4 and its comment.

Q: Can I identify myself as an "attorney at law" in marketing for a neutral arbitration and mediation practice?

A: Yes, according to the opinion, as long as the attorney does not form an association with a non-attorney to jointly provide the dispute resolution services.

Q: Will the panel review my brochure for accuracy, such as the statistics I cite or whether the disputes I list are really suited to arbitration or mediation?

A: No. The opinion states the panel declined to edit the brochure and would not pass on the accuracy of cited statistics or on whether the listed disputes would actually lend themselves to arbitration or mediation.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied the ABA Model Code of Professional Responsibility then in force in Rhode Island to a lawyer-arbitrator's advertising brochure, and separately flagged Model Rule 7.4 of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct as a future constraint on the "practice limited to" language, contingent on Rhode Island's not-yet-occurred adoption of that rule.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.4 (Model Rules of Professional Conduct; Communication of Fields of Practice, discussed prospectively as not yet adopted in Rhode Island at the time of this opinion)

Statutes:

• None cited.

Cases:

• None cited.

Other opinions cited:

• None cited.

See also

No sibling opinions yet indexed.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.courts.ri.gov/attorney-resources/Pages/Ethics-Advisory-Panel-default.aspx
• Original PDF: https://www.courts.ri.gov/Opinions/EAP%2087-03.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

Digest of Ethics Advisory Panel Opinion #87-3

Request #5

Issued January 8, 1988

An attorney wishing to establish a neutral practice as an attorney arbitrator seeks panel advice concerning the propriety of a brochure he plans to use to describe his services.

The brochure in question identifies the attorney as an "attorney at law" and describes his practice as "limited to providing impartial mediation [and] arbitration * * * ". It also includes a list of one or two word descriptions of disputes potentially amenable to resolution by arbitration or mediation.

Ethics Advisory Panel advice is protective in nature. There is no requirement that an attorney abide by a Panel opinion, but if he or she does, he or she is fully protected from any charge of impropriety.

With respect to the contents of the brochure, the Panel first takes the position that no violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility arises by virtue of the fact that the attorney is limiting his practice to providing neutral dispute resolution services. The Panel advises the attorney that it is proper for the attorney to identify himself as an attorney only as long as he does not form an association with a non-attorney to jointly provide dispute resolution services. Additionally, the Panel cautions the attorney that although it is presently permissible for him to use the phrase "practice limited to," this phrase would not be permissible if the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopts Rule 7.4 of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct and the comment thereto.

Finally, the Panel declines to embark on the task of editing the brochure and thus takes the position that it cannot pass on the accuracy of statistics cited or whether or not the disputes listed would lend themselves to alternative resolution processes.