Can a lawyer who teaches a public course accept a client who is a student in that course?

Plain-English summary

A lawyer taught a course in mobile home owners' law at a junior college. One student, who lived in a mobile home rental park, recommended the lawyer's employment by the park's tenants' association to challenge certain rental increases, and the association asked the lawyer to handle the matter. The lawyer asked whether he could ethically undertake the representation.

The committee saw no impropriety. In teaching the course, the lawyer did nothing to solicit the employment, and no "unsolicited advice" was given to laymen to obtain counsel or litigate within the meaning of DR 2-104(A), because the subject matter of the contemplated litigation was not discussed in the course. The committee described teaching college courses as a valuable public service and quoted Drinker, Legal Ethics, for the view that publicity which is the normal by-product of able and effective service is a proper kind of advertisement, while what is wrong is for a lawyer to augment that publicity by artificial stimulus.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1975, before The Florida Bar's adoption of the 2006 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. It applied the former Code of Professional Responsibility, which has since been replaced. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current Rule 4-7.18 before relying on any specific requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer who teaches a course represent someone connected to a student?

A: The opinion concluded he may accept employment from a tenants' association to which one of his students belongs, finding nothing in the teaching that solicited the work.

Q: What made this not solicitation?

A: Per the opinion, no unsolicited advice to obtain counsel or litigate was given within the meaning of DR 2-104(A), because the subject matter of the contemplated litigation was not discussed in the course.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied DR 2-104(A) of the former Code of Professional Responsibility, governing unsolicited advice and the acceptance of resulting employment. That subject corresponds to Model Rule 7.3 (solicitation of clients); the current Florida counterpart is Rule 4-7.18.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct (as cited, former Code):

• CPR DR 2-104(A) [See current 4-7.18(a)] (unsolicited advice and resulting employment)

See also

• FL Bar Ethics Op. 75-36: Teaching a Course to Laymen
• FL Bar Ethics Op. 75-16: Lawyer Newspaper Columns

Source

• Landing page: https://www.floridabar.org/etopinions/etopinion-75-10/
• Original PDF: https://www-media.floridabar.org/uploads/2017/04/FL-Bar-Ethics-Op-75-10-2.pdf

Original opinion text

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

FLORIDA BAR ETHICS OPINION
OPINION 75-10
May 15, 1975
Advisory ethics opinions are not binding.
An attorney teaching a course in mobile home owners' law at a junior college may accept employment from a mobile home tenants' association to which one of his or her students belong.
CPR: DR 2-104(A) [See current 4-7.18(a)]
Misc.: Drinker, Legal Ethics, p.218
Vice Chairman Daniels stated the opinion of the committee:
The inquiring lawyer teaches a course in mobile home owners' law at a junior college. One of the inquirer's students who lives in a mobile home rental park has recommended the inquirer's employment by the rental park's tenants association to challenge the validity of certain rental increases, and the association has asked the inquirer to handle the matter.
We are asked if the inquirer may ethically undertake the representation. The Committee sees no impropriety in the representation since, in teaching the course, the inquirer did nothing to solicit the proposed employment. No "unsolicited advice" was given to laymen to obtain counsel or litigate within the meaning of DR 2-104(A), since the subject matter of the contemplated litigation was not discussed in the course which the inquirer taught.
Teaching college courses is a valuable public service and, as stated in Drinker, Legal Ethics, p. 218:
When a lawyer has the opportunity to perform a service to the community which will place him in the public eye, he need not hesitate to seek or accept it because if successful he will appear frequently in the newspapers, and will enlarge his circle of friends and acquaintances and thus attract new clients, some possibly who have theretofore employed another lawyer. Where publicity is the normal by-product of able and effective service, whether of a professional or non-professional character, this is a kind of "advertisement" which is entirely right and proper. Clients naturally gravitate to a lawyer who has successfully represented their friends or who has obtained the confidence of the community by effective public service. What is wrong is for the lawyer to augment by artificial stimulus the publicity normally resulting from what he does, seeing to it that his successes are broadcast and magnified.