Can a lawyer send letters to non-clients offering to conduct seminars on legal issues currently affecting them?

Plain-English summary

A lawyer for school districts asked whether he could write to representatives of other (non-client) school districts, noting complex school-law issues arising in the area, offering to conduct seminars on those problems, and inviting expressions of interest in attending.

The committee concluded the private communication did not recommend or solicit the lawyer's employment and so did not violate Rule 2-103. It added that, even though the letter neither directly advertised the lawyer's merits nor directly solicited business, it was appropriate to test its propriety as if it did. Citing Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Association, 436 U.S. 447 (1978), the committee noted that direct in-person solicitation may be disciplined where it carries dangers a state may prevent, and that the seminar must be conducted in a dignified manner, free of fraud, undue influence, intimidation, overreaching, or vexatious conduct (citing Rhoades and Teichner).

The committee cautioned that employment arising out of contacts initiated through the seminars could be accepted only in compliance with Rules 2-103 and 2-104, and said it could not be more specific because of the inartful drafting of those rules.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1981, under the former Illinois Code of Professional Responsibility and before Illinois adopted the 2010 Rules of Professional Conduct. The ISBA Board of Governors affirmed the opinion in July 2010 as generally consistent with the 2010 Rules (Rules 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3), while cautioning that the specific standards referenced may differ from the 2010 Rules. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer mail non-clients an offer to present a legal seminar?

A: The opinion concluded yes; the letter neither recommends nor solicits the lawyer's employment, so it does not violate the solicitation rule, provided the seminar is conducted in a dignified manner.

Q: What limits did the committee place on the seminars?

A: Per the opinion, the seminar must be dignified and free of fraud, undue influence, intimidation, overreaching, or vexatious conduct.

Q: Can the lawyer accept work that comes out of the seminars?

A: The committee said any employment arising from contacts initiated through the seminars may be accepted only in compliance with Rules 2-103 and 2-104.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied Rules 2-103 and 2-104 of the Illinois Code of Professional Responsibility (solicitation and recommendation of employment) and EC 2-9, against the constitutional backdrop of Ohralik. The Board's 2010 affirmation maps the analysis to current Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct 7.1 (communications about services), 7.2 (advertising), and 7.3 (solicitation), corresponding to ABA Model Rules 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Illinois Code Rules 2-103, 2-104; EC 2-9 (applied in the opinion)
• Illinois RPC 7.1, 7.2, 7.3 (2010 equivalents per the Board's affirmation)
• MR 7.1 (communications about a lawyer's services); MR 7.2 (advertising); MR 7.3 (solicitation)

Cases:

• Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Association, 436 U.S. 447 (1978), in-person solicitation may be disciplined
• In re Marshall I. Teichner, 75 Ill. 2d 88 (1979), solicitation discipline
• Rhoades v. Norfolk & Western Ry. Co., 78 Ill. 2d 217 (1979), improper solicitation

Other opinions cited:

• ISBA Opinions 623 and 648 (solicitation and advertising)

See also

• ISBA Ethics Op. 812: Pens Imprinted With a Firm Name
• ISBA Ethics Op. 12-04: Labeling Direct Solicitations as Advertising
• ISBA Ethics Op. 14-04: Solicitation of Personal Injury Cases

Source

• Landing page: https://www.isba.org/ethics/opinions/727