May a Georgia lawyer use a third-party vendor to request and obtain documents from a nonparty?

Plain-English summary

The opinion addresses a lawyer's use of an outside vendor to draft, serve, and follow up on requests for medical records, bills, or other documents from nonparties. It concludes that the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct do not categorically prohibit this arrangement. Rule 5.3 permits a lawyer to rely on nonlawyer assistants, including a person or entity connected to the lawyer by employment, contract, or another relationship.

The lawyer must make reasonable efforts to ensure that the vendor's conduct is compatible with the lawyer's professional obligations, communicate suitable directions, and supervise the delegated work. The lawyer retains responsibility for the vendor's work and is responsible for inappropriate conduct the lawyer orders or ratifies. Partners and lawyers with managerial authority also must maintain firm measures reasonably assuring compliance with the Georgia Rules.

The opinion links that supervisory duty to competence and independent professional judgment. A lawyer may not begin or continue an arrangement that prevents sufficient oversight, interferes with competent representation, or impairs professional judgment. If an existing arrangement compromises or will compromise competence or judgment, the opinion says the lawyer should end the vendor arrangement or withdraw from the representation.

The same limits apply when an insurer or another person retaining, employing, or paying the lawyer requires use of a vendor. Rule 5.4(c) prevents that person from directing or regulating the lawyer's professional judgment. If the lawyer and the client or payer cannot agree on a vendor arrangement that permits the lawyer to meet the Georgia Rules, the opinion says the lawyer should withdraw. It leaves unauthorized-practice questions and other legal obligations outside its scope.

In practice

Under this opinion, a lawyer may delegate document-request work to an outside vendor only while retaining the right and ability to direct and supervise the vendor. The lawyer remains responsible for the delegated work and may not allow the arrangement, including one required by an insurer or other payer, to interfere with competent representation or professional judgment.

For vendors obtaining sensitive or confidential material such as medical records, the opinion states that state and federal law may add requirements outside its scope. It also states that the lawyer must take steps to ensure the vendor complies with those requirements under Rule 5.3.

Common questions

Q: May a Georgia lawyer use an outside vendor to obtain records from a nonparty?

A: Yes, under appropriate circumstances. The opinion permits the arrangement when the lawyer can supervise the vendor, provide competent representation, and retain professional judgment.

Q: How much autonomy may the vendor have?

A: The lawyer must retain the right and ability to direct and appropriately supervise the vendor. An arrangement that does not permit sufficient oversight to assure compatible conduct is not permissible under the opinion.

Q: Is the lawyer responsible for the vendor's conduct?

A: The opinion says the lawyer retains responsibility for the nonlawyer assistant's work and is responsible for inappropriate conduct the lawyer orders or ratifies. Rule 5.3 requires reasonable efforts, suitable directions, and supervision.

Q: May an insurer require defense counsel to use a particular vendor?

A: Not when the lawyer believes or reasonably should believe the arrangement will likely interfere with professional judgment. If the lawyer and the client or payer cannot agree on an arrangement consistent with the Georgia Rules, the opinion says the lawyer should withdraw.

Q: Does the opinion decide whether a vendor's work is the unauthorized practice of law?

A: No. It identifies unauthorized-practice obligations as a matter of law outside the opinion's scope and cites Rule 5.5(a) and Comment 2.

Background and rules framework

The opinion principally applies Georgia Rules 5.3 and 5.1(a) to the selection, direction, supervision, and responsibility for outside nonlawyer assistants. It connects those duties to competence under Rule 1.1 and to independent professional judgment under Rules 1.7, 1.8(f), 2.1, and 5.4(c). Rule 1.2(a) allows a client to direct decisions about the representation's scope and objectives, including selection of an outside nonlawyer provider, while Rule 1.2 Comment 2 addresses withdrawal when the lawyer and client cannot agree.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Georgia Rule 1.1 and Comment 5 (competent representation)
• Georgia Rule 1.2(a) and Comment 2 (client direction and disagreement)
• Georgia Rules 1.7, 1.8(f), and 2.1 (professional judgment)
• Georgia Rule 5.1(a) and Comment 2 (firm measures and internal procedures)
• Georgia Rule 5.3(a)-(c) and Comments 1, 2, 4, and 5 (nonlawyer assistants)
• Georgia Rule 5.4(c) (direction by a person who recommends, employs, or pays the lawyer)
• Georgia Rule 5.5(a) and Comment 2 (unauthorized practice issue outside the opinion's scope)

Statutes:

• O.C.G.A. § 9-11-34(c) (requests for production from nonparties)

See also

• ABA Formal Op. 506: Responsibilities Regarding Nonlawyer Assistants
• GA Ethics Op. 23-1: Real Estate Closings by Video Conference
• GA Ethics Op. 86-5: Delegating Real Estate Closings to Nonlawyers
• GA Ethics Op. 05-11: Insurer Subrogation and Concurrent Representation

Source

• Landing page: https://www.gabar.org/handbook?rule=formal-advisory-opinion-no-24-1

Original opinion text

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

STATE BAR OF GEORGIA
FORMAL ADVISORY OPINION NO. 24-1
Approved on August 11, 2026 Pursuant to Bar Rule 4-403 By Order of the Supreme Court of Georgia Supreme Court Docket No. S26U0157 (Proposed Formal Advisory Opinion No. 23-R1)

QUESTION PRESENTED:

May a lawyer use a third-party vendor to request the production of documents from a non-party pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-34(c) and to follow up on and effectuate such a request to a non-party, and if so, what degree of autonomy may the lawyer allow the third-party vendor?

SUMMARY ANSWER:

Lawyers are authorized to use and rely on nonlawyer assistants to assist in the representation of clients. Under appropriate circumstances, that could include the use of a third-party vendor to request the production of medical records, bills, and other documents from nonparties and to follow up on and effectuate such requests to nonparties on the lawyer’s behalf. But such an arrangement would not be appropriate if the lawyer believes, or reasonably should believe, the arrangement, or the particular third-party vendor, will interfere with or inhibit the lawyer’s responsibilities under the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct, most notably including the lawyer’s responsibility to oversee the nonlawyer assistant, the lawyer’s responsibility to provide competent representation, or the lawyer’s ability to exercise professional judgment. Furthermore, such an arrangement would not be permissible if the lawyer does not retain the right and ability to appropriately supervise the third-party vendor’s work.

OPINION:

Increasingly, members of the State Bar of Georgia have used third-party vendors to assist them in requesting the production of documents in civil actions. Often, those requests seek the production of medical records of a plaintiff or other party to a lawsuit, with the requests being directed to nonparty medical providers. In some instances, an insurer who has hired and pays the lawyer to represent an insured may direct or require the lawyer to use such a third-party vendor to request the production of medical records. The degree to which such third-party vendors handle the process of drafting, serving, and following up on the request for production may vary widely from one such vendor, case, and request to the next.

The question presented, thus, includes whether the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct entirely prohibit a lawyer from using such third-party vendors to request the production of documents; and if not, under what circumstances and subject to what restrictions may a lawyer use such third-party vendors for this purpose?

Generally, a client may direct the lawyer on decisions concerning the scope and objectives of the lawyer’s representation of the client, including directing the selection of a particular nonlawyer service provider outside the lawyer’s firm. Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct 1.2(a) and 5.3, cmt. 5. But when done in the context of a pending civil action, “lawyers and parties may have additional obligations that are a matter of law beyond the scope of” the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct. Rule 5.3, cmt. 5. These obligations, which are outside the scope of this opinion, include avoiding the unauthorized practice of law. 1

The Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct permit lawyers to use or rely on nonlawyer assistants to assist the lawyer in rendering legal services to a client. Rule 5.3 cmt. 4. “Assistants” are not limited to those titled as assistants and employed by a lawyer or firm; “assistants” as used here includes any person or entity that assists the lawyer in representing a client in a matter, whether by employment, contract, or other relationship with the lawyer or firm.

When relying on such nonlawyers, a lawyer “shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that the person’s conduct is compatible with the professional obligations of the lawyer.” Rule 5.3(a) and (b). Accordingly, the lawyer must supervise the work delegated to a nonlawyer and “should communicate directions appropriate under the circumstances to give reasonable assurance that the nonlawyer’s conduct is compatible with the professional obligations of the lawyer.” Rule 5.3(a), (b), and cmts. 2 and 4.

In any arrangement in which a lawyer relies on a nonlawyer assistant, the lawyer will retain responsibility for the nonlawyer assistant’s work. Rule 5.3 and cmts. 1 and 2. As such, a lawyer will be responsible for any inappropriate conduct of the nonlawyer in the context of his work for the lawyer if the lawyer either orders or ratifies the conduct in question. Rule 5.3(c)(1). Law firm partners and lawyers with managerial authority in a firm must also “make reasonable efforts to ensure that the firm has in effect measures giving reasonable assurance that all lawyers in the firm conform to the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct,” including as to the use of nonlawyer assistants by lawyers in the firm. Rule 5.1(a); see Rule 5.1(a) cmt. 2 (internal policies and procedures).

Additionally, one of a lawyer’s chief responsibilities is to provide competent representation to a client. Rule 1.1. Competent handling of a particular matter includes “use of methods and procedures meeting the standards of competent practitioners.” Rule 1.1, cmt. 5. In all cases, the lawyer may not initiate or continue with such an arrangement if it interferes with the lawyer’s ability to exercise professional judgment. See Rules 1.7 and cmts. 2 and 10, 1.8(f) and cmt. 5, 2.1, and 5.4(c).

In keeping with these principles, a lawyer may only use or rely on a third-party vendor to request and obtain medical records or any other documents from a nonparty if the lawyer properly complies with his responsibilities under the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct. Thus, if such an arrangement does not allow the lawyer to exercise sufficient oversight to give reasonable assurance that the third-party vendor’s conduct is compatible with the professional obligations of the lawyer, then the lawyer should not undertake or continue with the arrangement. See Rule 5.3, cmt. 4. 2 If a lawyer believes, or reasonably should believe, that such an arrangement would interfere with the lawyer’s ability to provide competent representation to the client or the lawyer’s ability to exercise professional judgment, the lawyer should not enter into the arrangement. See Rules 1.1, 1.8(f), 2.1, and 5.4(c). If a lawyer has entered into such an arrangement and the lawyer believes it has compromised or will compromise the lawyer’s ability to provide competent representation to the client or to exercise professional judgment, the lawyer should either terminate the arrangement with the third-party vendor or withdraw from the representation.

Where a lawyer does enter into such an arrangement, the lawyer must supervise the work delegated to the third-party vendor. Rule 5.3(a), (b), and cmt. 1. Ultimately, the lawyer will be responsible for the conduct of the third-party vendor in the context of the representation as the lawyer would be with any other nonlawyer assistant. See Rule 5.3. 3

An additional concern exists where a lawyer has been retained, employed, or paid by a person to represent someone else and the person retaining, employing, or paying the lawyer seeks to impose a requirement that the lawyer use a third-party vendor in the context of that representation. 4 Rule 5.4(c) prohibits a lawyer from permitting “a person who recommends, employs, or pays the lawyer to render legal services for another to direct or regulate the lawyer’s professional judgment in rendering such legal services.” In the context of such an arrangement, the lawyer would not be permitted to follow a direction to use a third-party vendor to request the production of documents from a non-party if the lawyer believes or reasonably should believe the arrangement will likely interfere with the lawyer’s professional judgment in rendering legal services to the client. Such reasonable belief may be formed on the basis of contract terms, course of conduct, specific instances, or other facts known to the lawyer.

Furthermore, if the client, or insurer, and the lawyer cannot agree on whether the use of a specific third-party vendor or other nonlawyer assistant will allow the lawyer to meet his or her obligations under the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct, then the lawyer should withdraw from the representation. See Rule 1.2, cmt. 2. 5

___________

1 When or whether a person complies with Georgia law or engages in unauthorized practice of law is beyond the scope of this opinion; however, see Rule 5.5(a) and cmt. 2.

2 A lawyer would not be permitted to undertake or continue an arrangement in which the lawyer is not permitted or able to appropriately direct the actions of the third-party vendor in carrying out the work of serving, following up on, or effectuating a request for production of documents or things. In that situation, the arrangement would impermissibly inhibit the lawyer’s ability to “communicate directions appropriate under the circumstances to give reasonable assurance that the nonlawyer’s conduct is compatible with the professional obligations of the lawyer.” Rule 5.3, cmt. 4.

3 The use of nonlawyers outside the firm to assist in procuring sensitive or confidential information or documents, such as medical records, may also implicate other considerations under state and federal law (e.g., maintaining confidentiality of protected health information). While outside the scope of this opinion, the lawyer must take steps to ensure that any nonlawyer relied on by the lawyer complies with those requirements. See Rule 5.3(a) and (c), cmt. 4.

4 One example is where an insurer retains, employs, or pays a lawyer to represent an insured. However, this potential issue and the related considerations would apply to any situation where the person retaining, employing, or paying the lawyer seeks to require the lawyer to use a particular non-lawyer assistant in representing someone else (e.g., a company paying the lawyer to represent its employee).

5 Where a lawyer uses or relies on a third-party vendor as a nonlawyer assistant at the direction of the client or the person retaining, employing, or paying for the representation, the lawyer’s work in supervising the conduct of the third-party vendor requires the lawyer to exercise professional legal judgment. Such supervisory authority is specifically reserved to the lawyer, and time spent exercising that authority is not “administrative,” “secretarial,” or “paralegal” work.