My firm wants to mail businesses letters offering a free meeting to discuss legal issues. Do we have to mark the letter 'advertisement,' even though it doesn't ask for their business?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney worked for a firm that wanted to mail letters to businesses with which the firm had no family or prior professional relationship, offering to meet free of charge to discuss legal issues affecting the business. The letters would be sent alone, without brochures or pamphlets. The stated primary motivation was to gain public-speaking experience and to inform businesses of critical legal issues. The attorney asked whether the letter could be sent without the "advertisement" label and whether the firm could contact the business afterward to schedule a meeting.

The panel analyzed the question under Rule 7.3 (Direct Contact with Prospective Clients), which addresses direct solicitation. It noted that the rules impose specific criteria on attorney advertising to protect the public from being misled or coerced, and that Rule 7.3(a) defines "solicit" broadly to include written communications directed to a specific recipient that do not meet the labeling requirements of paragraph (b).

The panel concluded that, although the letter would not request employment, it is still considered a solicitation under Rule 7.3. As a result, the attorney may send the proposed letters only if each is clearly labeled "advertisement" as the rule requires: plainly marked "advertisement" on the face of the envelope and at the top of each page in type larger than the largest type used in the communication, with a copy sent to the Supreme Court Disciplinary Counsel and a copy retained by the lawyer for three years (with a single-copy-plus-list option for identical mailings).

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1995, after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988, and it applies Rule 7.3 as originally adopted. The Rhode Island Supreme Court later revised the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2007 as part of the nationwide Ethics 2000 process, which renumbered and amended the solicitation and advertising provisions. Later court decisions and rule amendments have also reshaped this area. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule or labeling requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Is a letter that doesn't ask for business still a solicitation?

A: Under this opinion, yes. The panel held that the letter is still a solicitation under Rule 7.3 even though it does not request employment, because it is a written communication directed to specific recipients with whom the firm has no prior relationship.

Q: What labeling did the panel require?

A: The panel required each letter to be plainly marked "advertisement" on the envelope and at the top of each page in type larger than the largest type used, with a copy filed with the Supreme Court Disciplinary Counsel and a copy retained for three years.

Q: Did the panel say the letters were prohibited?

A: No. The panel said the attorney may send the letters, provided each is clearly labeled "advertisement" pursuant to Rule 7.3.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Rule 7.3 (Direct Contact with Prospective Clients) of the Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct, corresponding to Model Rule 7.3. As the panel quoted it, Rule 7.3(a) restricts solicitation of prospective clients with whom the lawyer has no family or prior professional relationship and defines "solicit" to include written communications not meeting the labeling requirements of paragraph (b). Paragraph (b), as quoted, prescribes the "advertisement" labeling and the filing-and-retention requirements the panel applied.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.3 (solicitation of clients / direct contact with prospective clients)
• RI RPC 7.3

Statutes:

• None cited.

Cases:

• None cited.

Other opinions cited:

• None cited.

See also

• RI EAP Op. 95-21: Mailing Realtors Title-Search and Closing-Cost Coupons
• RI EAP Op. 95-47: Nonlawyer Selling Collection Forms and Referring Clients for a Fee

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%2095-45.pdf

Original opinion text

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

Final

ETHICS ADVISORY PANEL
OPINION # 95-45, - REQUEST # 612
ISSUED - OCTOBER 12, 1995

The inquiring attorney is employed by a law firm that seeks to mail letters to businesses with whom the firm has no family or prior professional relationship. The inquiring attorney would meet with the businesses, free of charge, to discuss legal issues affecting the business. The letter would be sent alone without brochures or pamphlets.

The primary motivation for this letter is to obtain experience in public speaking and to inform businesses of critical legal issues. The inquiring attorney asks whether the letter could be sent without labeling "advertisement" and whether the firm could contact the business after the letter is received to schedule a meeting.

The Rules of Professional Conduct mandate specific criteria regarding advertisement by attorneys. The Rules protect the public from being mislead or coerced by an attorney's conduct.

Rule 7.3 entitled "Direct Contact with Prospective Clients" is applicable to this particular inquiry because it addresses direct solicitation made by attorneys. That rule states in pertinent part:

(a) A lawyer may not solicit professional employment from a prospective client with whom the lawyer has no family or prior professional relationship, in person or otherwise, when a significant motive for the lawyer's doing so is the lawyer's pecuniary gain. The term "solicit" includes contact in person, by telephone or telegraph, or by other communication directed to a specific recipient and includes any written form of communication directed to a specific recipient and not meeting the requirements of paragraph (b) of this rule.

(b) Written communication.

(1) Written communication to prospective clients with whom the lawyer has no family or prior professional relationship are subject to the following requirements:

If an attorney is going to communicate in the manner described herewith, a prospective client as to whom the lawyer has no prior relationship with, then the written communication must be labeled accordingly as set forth in subsection (b)(1) and (2). Although the letter would not request employment from the business, the letter is still considered to be a solicitation according to Rule 7.3. The inquiring attorney may send the proposed letters so long as each letter is

(a) Such written communications shall be plainly marked advertisement on the face of the envelope and at the top of each page of the written communication in type on size larger that the largest type used in the written communication.

(b) A copy of each such written communication shall be sent to the Supreme Court Disciplinary Counsel and another copy shall be retained by the lawyer for three (3) years. If written communications identical in content are sent to two (2) or more prospective clients, the lawyer may comply with this requirement by sending a single copy together with a list of the names and addresses of persons to whom the written communication was sent to the Supreme Court Disciplinary Counsel as well as retaining the same information.

clearly labeled advertisement pursuant to Rule 7.3.