Can a lawyer run a classified newspaper ad asking 'Is it wise to settle?' and urging people who are sued or have a claim to seek a lawyer's advice?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry asked whether a classified advertisement that appeared in a San Antonio newspaper, reading "IS IT WISE TO SETTLE? If sued or have a claim a lawyer's advice is helpful," violated any Canon of Ethics.

The Committee concluded that the ad violates Canons 24 and 25, and that the Committee's Opinion 95 applies. One member who agreed it was a violation added that the same advice could be given in an educational program of a bar association and, as such, would not violate any rule of ethics. The vote was 7-1.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1955, under the former Texas Canons of Ethics, which the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct replaced effective January 1, 1990. The advertising and solicitation restrictions the opinion applies predate Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977), which held that categorical bans on lawyer advertising violate the First Amendment, so the Canon 24 and 25 framework used here has since been substantially narrowed. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Was the "Is it wise to settle?" classified ad permitted under this opinion?

A: No. The Committee held it violated Canons 24 and 25 and that its Opinion 95 applied (7-1).

Q: Did any member see a permissible version of the message?

A: Yes. One member who agreed it was a violation thought the same advice could be conveyed through a bar association's educational program without violating the Canons.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets former Texas Canons 24 (advertising) and 25 (stirring up litigation) of the Canons of Ethics of the State Bar of Texas, and applies the Committee's Opinion 95. The modern analogs are ABA Model Rule 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services) and Model Rule 7.3 (solicitation of clients).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services), as the modern analog
• MR 7.3 (solicitation of clients), as the modern analog
• Texas Canon 24 (advertising)
• Texas Canon 25 (stirring up litigation)

Other opinions cited:

• Texas Ethics Opinion 95: applied to the advertisement

See also

• TX Ethics Op. 133: Lawyer Office Window Signs
• TX Ethics Op. 129: Displaying Settlement-Check Copies
• TX Ethics Op. 161: Soliciting Work From Another Lawyer

Source

• Landing page: https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-120/
• Original PDF: https://tcle-web.s3.amazonaws.com/public/documents/Opinion_120.pdf

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION PRESENTED

Does the following classified ad, appearing in a San Antonio newspaper, violate any Canon of Ethics:

"IS IT WISE TO SETTLE?
If sued - or have a claim A lawyer's advice is helpful."

18 Baylor L. Rev. 242 (1966)

SOLICITATION - STIRRING UP LITIGATION - NEWSPAPERS
A classified advertisement in a newspaper stating, "IS IT WISE TO SETTLE? / If suedΧor have a claim / A lawyer=s advise is helpful," is improper.

Canons 24, 25.

The committee is of the opinion that this ad violates Canons 24 and 25, and that the committee's Opinion No. 95 applies here. One member who holds that it is a violation believes, however, that this same advice could be given in an educational program of a bar association and, as such, not violate any rule of ethics. (7-1)

Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 120 (1955)