Can a law firm offer a union's members discounted legal fees and answer questions at the union hall without violating the anti-solicitation rules?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1988. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct, with citations.
Plain-English summary
A law firm negotiating with a union proposed to provide legal services to members at 20 percent below its normal rates, with free initial consultations, and to be available at the union hall once a month at no fee to answer general questions. The union would receive no direct benefit beyond the reduced fees for members. The firm asked whether this would violate the solicitation provisions of the Disciplinary Rules.
The committee analyzed DR 2-103(E), which bars paying a person or organization to solicit employment but exempts cooperating with a "qualified legal assistance organization," and DR 1-102(A)(2), which bars circumventing a rule through another's acts. It distinguished its recent Opinion 87-3, where it had found a financial-services agency's discount-letter arrangement an improper "payment" to the agency, because that agency was not a qualified legal assistance organization. A union, by contrast, fits the definition of a bona fide organization that recommends or furnishes legal services to its members, provided the stated conditions are met. The committee traced the exemption to the line of First Amendment cases culminating in United Transportation Union v. State Bar of Michigan, which protected union members' right to band together to obtain legal services, including fee-limited referral programs. To avoid any constitutional conflict, the committee read the rule to treat the firm's offer of discounted rates to union members as protected cooperation under DR 2-103(E). It cautioned that a payment of cash or tangible value by the firm to the union itself would present a very different question.
On the question table, the committee drew on its Opinion 86-3 (a firm may give an educational seminar to clients and non-clients if neither the brochure nor presentation recommends hiring the firm). General-question sessions go somewhat further than education, but the committee concluded they fall within DR 2-103(E)'s encouragement of group legal services, subject to DR 2-103(D): any suggestion that the firm handle a particular member's legal problem must be initiated by the member, not the firm.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1988, before Massachusetts's adoption of the 2015 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.
Common questions
Q: Can a firm offer a union's members discounted legal fees?
A: The committee concluded yes. Because a union qualifies as a "qualified legal assistance organization," discounting fees to its members is protected cooperation under DR 2-103(E), not an improper payment to solicit business.
Q: How is this different from paying an agency to send discount letters?
A: In Opinion 87-3 the committee found that arrangement an improper payment because the financial-services agency was not a qualified legal assistance organization; a union meets that definition, so the exemption applies.
Q: Can the firm answer members' questions at the union hall?
A: Yes, free general-question sessions fall within DR 2-103(E)'s encouragement of group legal services, but under DR 2-103(D) any suggestion that the firm handle a member's particular problem must come from the member, not the firm.
Background and rules framework
The opinion interpreted DR 2-103(E) (paying others to solicit, with an exemption for cooperation with a qualified legal assistance organization), the definition of that term in the Disciplinary Rules, DR 2-103(D), and DR 1-102(A)(2). Those provisions correspond today to Model Rule 7.2 (advertising and paying others to recommend a lawyer, including group and prepaid legal service plans) and Model Rule 7.3 (solicitation). The analysis rests on the First Amendment group-legal-services cases.
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- DR 2-103(E) / Model Rule 7.2 (paying others to recommend; group legal services exemption)
- DR 2-103(D) / Model Rule 7.3 (solicitation; member must initiate)
- DR 1-102(A)(2) (circumventing a rule through another's acts)
Cases:
- United Transportation Union v. State Bar of Michigan, 401 U.S. 576 (1971) (First Amendment protection for union legal-services programs)
Other opinions cited:
- MBA Opinions 87-3 (improper payment to a financial-services agency) and 86-3 (educational seminars for clients and non-clients)
See also
- MA Bar Ethics Op. 93-5: Soliciting co-plaintiffs to join a lawsuit
- MA Bar Ethics Op. 97-2: Paying businesses to solicit employees and prepaid-plan administration fees
Source
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 1988 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.