Ezel / Ethics Opinions / MOLEC

Could a plaintiff’s investigator contact a defendant’s bookkeeper when the lawyer knew of no counsel for the defendant?

Short answer On the stated facts, the opinion allowed direct contact with the bookkeeper without violating Rule 4-4.2.
Bar
MOLEC
Issued
1999

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1999. 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 plaintiff had sued an individual defendant. The defendant had been served, but no lawyer had appeared and plaintiff’s counsel knew of no lawyer representing the defendant. Counsel asked whether an investigator could contact the defendant’s bookkeeper about the matter.

Based on those facts, the opinion allowed direct contact with the bookkeeper under Rule 4-4.2.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1999, before Missouri’s 2007 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. Later amendments or opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context and verify current rules before relying on it. The official Rule 4-1.9 and 4-1.10 reference notes identify July 1, 2007 amendments.

Common questions

Q: Did service of the complaint itself bar contact?

A: No. The opinion allowed contact on the stated facts.

Q: Did the answer address a known represented defendant?

A: No. It rested on counsel knowing of no lawyer for the defendant.

Background and rules framework

The answer expressly addressed Rule 4-4.2 on the described unrepresented-party facts.

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 a client and has filed suit against an individual defendant. The defendant has been served with process. No attorney has entered an appearance for the defendant and Attorney knows of no attorney representing the defendant. May Attorney’s investigator contact a bookkeeper that is employed by defendant regarding the subject of the representation?

ANSWER: Based upon the information Attorney has provided, Attorney may make direct contact with the bookkeeper without violating Rule 4–4.2.

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 1999. 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