May defense counsel send a social-network friend request to a represented plaintiff to view the plaintiff’s posts?

Short answer No. The opinion treats a Facebook or MySpace friend request as a communication under Rule 4-4.2 and bars sending it directly to the represented plaintiff.
Bar
MOLEC
Issued
2009

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 2009. 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 2009
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

A defense lawyer in a personal-injury case wanted to access the represented plaintiff’s social-network posts. The proposal was to create an account and ask the plaintiff directly to accept a friend request.

The opinion says the friend request is a communication for Rule 4-4.2 purposes. Because the plaintiff is represented, the lawyer may not send that request directly to the plaintiff.

In practice

The opinion applies the represented-person contact rule to the proposed social-network friend request sent directly to the plaintiff.

Common questions

Q: Is a friend request a communication under Rule 4-4.2?

A: Yes. The opinion expressly treats the request to join the plaintiff’s Facebook or MySpace account as a communication.

Q: May the defense lawyer send the request directly?

A: No. The opinion bars sending it directly to the represented plaintiff.

Q: Why did the lawyer want access?

A: The lawyer sought posts allegedly damaging to the plaintiff’s personal-injury case.

Background and rules framework

Rule 4-4.2 governs direct communication with a person known to be represented. The opinion applies it to the proposed Facebook or MySpace friend request.

Citations and references

Missouri Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • Rule 4-4.2

See also

Source

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION: Attorney represents Defendant in a personal injury case. Plaintiff maintains an account on a social networking site such as MySpace or Facebook. Plaintiff is allegedly making statements on the social networking site that would hurt Plaintiff’s case. A third party witness is unwilling to print said information off of the networking site. Can Attorney create an account on the social networking site and send a message to Plaintiff asking to be invited as Plaintiff’s friend? After being accepted as Plaintiff’s friend Attorney would have access to Plaintiff’s statements. Plaintiff is represented by counsel. If Attorney created an account on a social networking site and asked Plaintiff to be invited as a friend what ethical problems arise? Would said contact constitute communication with a person known to be represented?

ANSWER: Attorney’s request to be invited as a friend of Plaintiff’s Facebook/MySpace account would be a “communication” for purposes of Rule 4–4.2. Attorney may not send such a communication directly to plaintiff, in light of that rule.

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 2009. 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