WSBA 1998

Can a lawyer send a self-published lawyer-liability newsletter to judges they appear before?

Short answer: The committee concluded that sending the proposed newsletter to judges and justices should be allowed, assuming the lawyer is careful to comply with RPC 1.6 (confidentiality) and RPC 3.5 (ex parte communications and influencing a judge), and also complies with RPC 7.2(d), 7.3, and 7.4. It noted a possible legal question under RPC 3.5(b)'s 'permitted by law' language, on which it does not opine.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1998. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current Washington Rules of Professional Conduct, with citations.

Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.

About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

Plain-English summary

The inquiry concerned a lawyer who publishes a newsletter on lawyer-liability issues and proposed to send it to judges and justices before whom the lawyer practices. The committee concluded that, assuming the lawyer is careful to comply with RPC 1.6 regarding confidentiality and RPC 3.5 regarding ex parte communications and seeking to influence a judge, the sending of the proposed newsletter to judges and justices should be allowed.

The committee added that there may be a legal question to the extent RPC 3.5(b) refers to communication "permitted by law," and noted that the committee does not give legal opinions. It also directed the lawyer to be careful to comply with the requirements of RPC 7.2(d), 7.3, and 7.4.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1998, before the Washington State Bar Association's adoption of the 2006 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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. Washington's advertising and solicitation rules (RPC 7.2 through 7.4) and RPC 3.5 have been amended since 1998, so verify the current rule text and numbering before relying on it.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer mail a self-published newsletter to judges they appear before?

A: The committee concluded the mailing should be allowed, assuming the lawyer complies with RPC 1.6 (confidentiality) and RPC 3.5 (ex parte communications and influencing a judge).

Q: Which rules did the committee say apply to sending material to judges?

A: RPC 1.6 and RPC 3.5, plus RPC 7.2(d), 7.3, and 7.4, which the committee told the lawyer to comply with.

Q: Did the committee resolve whether the mailing is legal?

A: No. It noted that RPC 3.5(b) refers to communication "permitted by law" and said the committee does not give legal opinions.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied Washington RPC 1.6 (confidentiality of information) and RPC 3.5 (impartiality and decorum of the tribunal, including ex parte communications and seeking to influence a judge), along with RPC 7.2(d), 7.3, and 7.4 (advertising, direct contact, and communication of fields of practice). These correspond to ABA Model Rules 1.6, 3.5, 7.2, 7.3, and 7.4. The committee allowed the newsletter subject to compliance with those rules and flagged that RPC 3.5(b)'s "permitted by law" reference may raise a legal question outside its scope.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

ABA Model Rule 1.6 (confidentiality of information); Washington RPC 1.6
ABA Model Rule 3.5 (impartiality and decorum of the tribunal); Washington RPC 3.5, 3.5(b)
ABA Model Rule 7.2 (advertising); Washington RPC 7.2(d)
ABA Model Rule 7.3 (solicitation of clients); Washington RPC 7.3
ABA Model Rule 7.4 (communication of fields of practice and specialization); Washington RPC 7.4

Source

Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=1037

Original opinion text

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

Advisory Opinion: 1844
Year Issued: 1998
RPC(s): RPC 1.6; 3.5; 7.2(d); 7.3; 7.4
Subject: Communication with judges; sending lawyer liability newspaper to judges and justices

I have been instructed by the Rules of Professional Conduct Committee to respond to your ethics inquiry #1844 concerning the publication of a lawyer liability newspaper.

The Rules of Professional Conduct Committee has met and considered your request regarding any ethical issues raised by sending a newsletter on lawyer liability issues to judges and justices before whom you practice.

Assuming that you are careful to comply with RPC 1.6 regarding confidentiality, and RPC 3.5 regarding ex parte communications and/or seeking to influence a judge, the sending of your proposed newsletter to judges and justices should be allowed. There may be a legal question to the extent that RPC 3.5(b) refers to communication "permitted by law", and this committee does not give legal opinions.

You should also be careful to comply with the requirements of RPC 7.2(d), 7.3 and 7.4.

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1998 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Washington Rules of Professional Conduct and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.