Ezel / Ethics Opinions / MOLEC

May a firm send a newsletter to clients and prospects who have no known specific need for its services?

Short answer Yes, under the opinion’s stated conditions. The newsletter need not comply with Rule 4-7.3 when recipients include clients and others with no known specific need, but it must comply with Rules 4-7.1, 7.2, 7.4, and 7.5 and include the Rule 4-7.2(f) choice statement.
Bar
MOLEC
Issued
2007

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 2007. Ask about yours and see what the current Missouri Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 2007
Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later opinions or rule amendments may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
How much weight this carries: Under Missouri Supreme Court Rule 5.30, formal opinions are binding; informal opinions are advisory. Source.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

Plain-English summary

The lawyer planned a newsletter for clients and people with whom the firm had no prior relationship.

The opinion says a newsletter sent only to clients and others with no known specific need for the offered service does not have to comply with Rule 4-7.3. It says Rules 4-7.1, 7.2, 7.4, and 7.5 still apply. Assuming truthful, nonmisleading information, it sees no Rule 4-7.1 concern and directs inclusion of the choice statement from Rule 4-7.2(f).

In practice

For the newsletter described, the opinion excludes Rule 4-7.3 when recipients have no known specific need, while applying the other listed advertising rules and the choice statement.

Common questions

Q: Does Rule 4-7.3 apply to this newsletter?

A: Not if it is sent only to clients and others whom the lawyer does not know to have a specific need.

Q: What does the opinion say about truthful content?

A: It finds no Rule 4-7.1 concern assuming all information is truthful and not misleading.

Q: Which statement should the newsletter include?

A: The opinion calls for the choice statement in Rule 4-7.2(f).

Background and rules framework

The opinion distinguishes Rule 4-7.3 solicitation from a newsletter to people with no known specific need, and lists Rules 4-7.1, 7.2, 7.4, and 7.5 as applicable.

Citations and references

Missouri Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • Rule 4-7.1
  • Rule 4-7.2
  • Rule 4-7.3
  • Rule 4-7.4
  • Rule 4-7.5

See also

Source

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION: Attorney would like to send out a newsletter to clients and potential clients, i.e. individuals with whom the firm has not had a prior relationship of any kind. Would this practice violate rules 4–7.1, 4–7.2, 4–7.3(b) or 7–7.4?

ANSWER: If the newsletter is sent only to clients and others whom Attorney is not aware have a specific need, it does not need to comply with Rule 4–7.3. The newsletter must comply with Rules 4–7.1, 7.2, 7.4 and 7.5. There are no concerns with Rule 4–7.1, assuming that all of the information is truthful and not misleading. Attorney should include the “choice” statement found in Rule 4–7.2(f).

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 2007. Ezel checks the current Missouri Rules of Professional Conduct against your situation and cites the rules it relies on.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace