Could a lawyer join a living-trust company's client-intake and document-review program?

Short answer The opinion said the described program violated Rules 4-1.6, 4-1.7(b), 4-5.3, 4-5.4, 4-5.5, 4-7.3(b), and 4-8.4(a).

Bar

MOLEC

Issued

1994

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1994. Ask about yours and see what the current Missouri Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.

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 separate company proposed a living-trust program. Unsupervised nonlawyers would contact clients, collect information and checks, and prepare trust documents; a lawyer paid at the company's rate would review documents and send recommendations back to the company, which would deliver the final document.

The opinion said this entire program violated seven specified parts of Missouri Rule 4: 1.6, 1.7(b), 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 7.3(b), and 8.4(a). It did not assign a separate fact-specific reason to each citation.

Currency note

This 1994 opinion predates Missouri's 2007 amendments to its Rules of Professional Conduct. An official reference note identifies July 1, 2007 amendments to Rules 4-1.9 and 4-1.10. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context and verify current rules before relying on it.

Common questions

Q: Did the opinion approve the program?

A: No. It said the described program violated seven specified rule provisions.

Q: Who handled client intake?

A: Nonlawyers who were not under an attorney's supervision, according to the question.

Q: Who sent the final trust document?

A: The company, after receiving the lawyer's review or recommendations.

Background and rules framework

The opinion cited Missouri Rule 4 provisions 1.6, 1.7(b), 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 7.3(b), and 8.4(a) against the proposed program as a whole.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

Missouri Rule 4-1.6
Missouri Rule 4-1.7(b)
Missouri Rule 4-5.3
Missouri Rule 4-5.4
Missouri Rule 4-5.5
Missouri Rule 4-7.3(b)
Missouri Rule 4-8.4(a)

Source

Landing page: https://mo-legal-ethics.org/informal-opinion/940055/

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION: Attorney would participate in a living trust program run by a separate company. Non-attorneys who are not under the supervision of an attorney would contact the clients and gather information to prepare the living trust and would obtain a check for the company and a check for the attorney. Attorney would be a review attorney for documents sent by the company and advising the company of any changes needed to comply with Missouri law. Attorney will be compensated by the clients at a rate set by the company. Attorney is encouraged to make direct contact with the clients. Attorney will send the approved trust document or recommendations to the company. The company will send the final document to the client. ANSWER: This program would violate the following rules within Rule 4: 1.6, 1.7(b), 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, 7.3(b) and 8.4(a).

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 1994. 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