Can a legal services program have law-student clerks interview prospective clients to screen eligibility and identify the problem?

Plain-English summary

Law, Inc. of Hillsborough County, through its chief counsel, asked whether it could employ law students as part-time clerks during the school year and full-time when not in school, or law graduates between graduation and bar admission, to interview prospective clients. The interviews would determine the interviewee's eligibility to participate in the program and ascertain the general nature of the problem; legal problems would be referred to a Bar member employed by Law, Inc., while the interviewer might try to resolve nonlegal problems or refer the person elsewhere. It was understood that the clerk or intern would at all times be under the supervision of a Florida Bar member who would ultimately be professionally responsible for his actions.

The committee saw no ethical objection to Florida Bar members permitting that activity by the employees of Law, Inc., comparing Rule 1.860 of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1970, before The Florida Bar's adoption of the 2006 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. It applied the former Canons 35 and 47 and relied on prior Florida Opinion 66-56, which has since been withdrawn. A lawyer's responsibility for the work of nonlawyer assistants is now addressed by Rule 4-5.3. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against the current rules before relying on any specific requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can law students or clerks do client intake interviews?

A: Under this opinion, yes, for a legal services program, to screen eligibility and identify the general nature of the problem, so long as a supervising Bar member remains professionally responsible.

Q: What condition did the committee attach?

A: That the clerk or intern be at all times under the supervision of a Florida Bar member who is ultimately professionally responsible for the clerk's actions.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied the former Canons 35 and 47, addressing the use of lay employees under a lawyer's supervision, and relied on prior Opinion 66-56. A lawyer's responsibility for nonlawyer assistants is now addressed by Rule 4-5.3 of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar. The Model Rule analogue is Rule 5.3.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Canons 35 and 47 [Code of Professional Responsibility; nonlawyer assistants now in Rule 4-5.3]

Other authorities:

• Rule 1.860, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure [compared]

Other opinions cited:

• Florida Opinion 66-56 [since withdrawn]: Law, Inc. of Hillsborough County

See also

• FL Bar Ethics Op. 70-27: Lending a Name for Collection Letters

Source

• Landing page: https://www.floridabar.org/etopinions/etopinion-70-1/
• Original PDF: https://www-media.floridabar.org/uploads/2017/04/FL-Bar-Ethics-Op-70-1-2.pdf

Original opinion text

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

FLORIDA BAR ETHICS OPINION
OPINION 70-1
February 16, 1970
Advisory ethics opinions are not binding.
Law, Inc. of Hillsborough County may permit law students employed as clerks to interview prospective clients for the purpose of determining their eligibility to participate in the program and to ascertain the general nature of a prospective client's problem.
Canons: 35 and 47
Opinion: 66-56
Rule: Fla.R.Crim.P. 1.860
Chairman MacDonald stated the opinion of the committee:
Law, Inc. of Hillsborough County, which was the subject of our Opinion 66-56 [since withdrawn], through its chief counsel, a member of The Florida Bar, inquires whether or not it may employ law students as part-time clerks during the school year and as full-time clerks when not in attendance at school, or law graduates in the period between graduation and admission to The Florida Bar. These employees would interview prospective clients of Law, Inc. for the purpose of determining the interviewee's eligibility to participate in the program and to ascertain the general nature of his problem. In the event that the problem were legal he would be referred to a member of the Bar employed by Law, Inc. In some instances the interviewer would endeavor to solve nonlegal problems and in others he would refer the person to an appropriate source of assistance. It would be understood that the law clerk or intern would at all times be under the supervision of a member of The Florida Bar who ultimately will be professionally responsible for his actions.
We see no ethical objection to members of The Florida Bar permitting such action on behalf of the employees of Law, Inc. of Hillsborough County. Compare Rule 1.860, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure.