Office of Legal Ethics Counsel & Advisory Committee of the Supreme Court of Missouri Ethics Opinions
Free plain-English summaries of legal ethics opinions issued by the Office of Legal Ethics Counsel & Advisory Committee of the Supreme Court of Missouri, with full citations and source links on every page.
No Office of Legal Ethics Counsel & Advisory Committee of the Supreme Court of Missouri opinions match these filters
Try a different search term or clear the filters.
Could a lawyer working in a nonlawyer government investigation role interview a represented subject directly?
The opinion said Rule 4-4.2 did not apply if the lawyer was not practicing law or representing a client, but lawyer-directed contact would be barred through Rule 4-8.4(a).
Could a part-time assistant city attorney defend county circuit-court criminal cases?
The opinion allowed the defense except for cases arising from the city or involving city police.
Could a prosecutor continue representing an estate facing a Social Services Medicaid reimbursement claim?
The opinion found a conflict and required the prosecutor to withdraw from the probate case.
Could a lawyer solicit prospective clients through direct mail?
The opinion answered yes in principle but said Rule 7.3(c) prohibited the communication in some circumstances, without identifying those circumstances.
Could a lawyer likely to testify at trial still conduct discovery and argue pretrial motions?
The opinion said yes despite the lawyer's deposition, but said the lawyer should refrain from discovery and motion argument relating to the lawyer's veracity.
Did a joint law-offices advertisement make office-sharing lawyers one firm for a GAL conflict?
The opinion said yes: the advertisement implied a firm relationship, so the two lawyers were treated as one firm for conflicts, including imputed disqualification.
Could a lawyer mail accident-report prospects and charge a monthly fee for employee drivers' traffic cases?
The opinion generally allowed the mailings subject to Rule 4-7.3(c), especially subsection (c)(1), and found no Rule 4-1.5 violation in the monthly fee, while flagging Rule 4-1.8(f) if the employer paid.
Could an out-of-state lawyer move to Missouri and practice as a visiting attorney while awaiting Missouri licensure?
The opinion said no because Rule 9.03 did not authorize the ongoing Missouri practice described.
What disclaimer and expense limits applied to an auto-injury prospect letter claiming specialization and possible free healthcare?
The opinion required the Rule 4-7.4 disclaimer for the word specializes and pointed to Rule 4-1.8(e)'s bar on advancing client expenses other than litigation expenses.
Could a departing lawyer send different client-choice letters and call the new firm specialized?
The opinion approved the letters but required removal of the specializing-in claim or a Rule 4-7.4 disclaimer, and required the new firm's name in the client-choice letter.
Could a lawyer's separate corporation house its executive office within the lawyer's practice?
The opinion allowed sharing if the two businesses remained visibly and operationally separate, with a separate corporate phone and records protected for confidentiality; it also flagged conflict checking.
Could a lawyer pay a marketing firm based on gross revenue or calls for contact and advertising?
The opinion said the proposed marketing and compensation arrangement would violate Rules 4-5.4(a) and 4-7.3(a).
Could lawyers sponsor student distribution of a legal newspaper and receive advertising in return?
The opinion answered yes to the proposed educational newspaper sponsorship with some advertising.
Could a lawyer not licensed in Missouri discuss general legal issues on a broadcast heard there?
The opinion found no rules violation on the assumptions that no attorney-client relationship arose from the broadcast and no legal advice was given to specific individuals.
Could a lawyer represent a former DWI client's ex-spouse in a post-divorce modification?
The opinion found no conflict if the lawyer held no former-client confidential information usable against that client, while preserving the court's authority to disqualify.
Could a former prosecutor testify for the county about a private client's statement concerning a potential county suit?
The opinion treated the statement as confidential under Rule 4-1.6 and allowed testimony only with the client's consent or a court order after the confidentiality issue was fully presented.
Could a city's contract lawyer support a current council member's campaign and keep representing the city?
The opinion said involvement in that council member's political campaign would create a conflict requiring withdrawal from city representation.
Could a lawyer represent two cities and their road district in a lawsuit over tax distributions?
The opinion barred joint representation under Rule 4-1.7 despite city consent and declined to decide separate representation because it lacked facts for Rule 4-1.9.
Could a lawyer offer will preparation through general church announcements and pay for facility use?
The opinion found no violation in the described program without individual solicitation and allowed a church fee directly tied to use of its facilities.
Which current or former company drivers could a lawyer contact ex parte after a company vehicle accident?
The opinion barred contact with the dismissed defendant/former driver, allowed contact with an uninvolved current driver, and barred a former driver with maintenance responsibility for the accident…
How did the historical opinion treat client funds after years without a response?
The opinion said the lawyer could not recognize the funds as income and had to keep them in trust, with account choice dependent on amount and avoiding costs that depleted client funds.
Could a town trustee also represent the town, with or without compensation?
The opinion found no conflict for unpaid work; paid work was allowed if the lawyer took no part in and exerted no influence over selection or compensation.
What did the opinion require when a conservator's annual-settlement information suggested misuse of funds?
The opinion barred disclosure to the court or bond company without consent, permitted notice of resignation, and required a complete and accurate filing or none; if the conservator refused…
Did a possible future call as witness require a lawyer to withdraw from resumed representation?
The opinion said Rule 3.7 did not require withdrawal yet, though the judge could disqualify counsel; if actually a witness, the lawyer could not advocate at trial but could handle other case work.
Could a lawyer serve an attorney-lien notice directly on a former client who had new counsel?
The opinion allowed direct service only if the former client's new lawyer refused to accept service on the client's behalf.
Could adoptive parents' lawyer give the birth mother copies of documents she signed after a dispute arose?
The opinion allowed disclosure only with the adoptive parents' consent or through subpoena or other lawful discovery if litigation was filed.
Could a lawyer who handled a husband's child-emancipation record then represent his new wife on marital matters?
The opinion barred the new-wife representation if it was substantially related to the emancipation or if confidences about the husband or marriage could be used against him.
What could a lawyer tell business clients, individual clients, or police after another client alleged business crime?
The opinion barred disclosure of the reporting client's information to the business or individuals, required withdrawal from the business, and limited law-enforcement disclosure to a court order…
Could a defense lawyer who formerly represented Defendant 1 take Defendant 2 in the same prosecution?
The opinion said Rule 1.9(a) applied and subsection (b) might apply; the lawyer could not represent Defendant 2 without Defendant 1's consent after full disclosure.
Could a lawyer take Defendant 2 after Defendant 1 in the same criminal case changed counsel?
The opinion said no unless former client Defendant 1 consented after full disclosure.
Could a lawyer list National Board of Trial Advocacy certification on letterhead?
The opinion said yes if the lawyer included the Rule 7.4 disclaimer that Missouri's Supreme Court and Bar do not review or approve certifiers or specialist designations.
Could counsel for a stepparent in a pending adoption represent either spouse in their divorce?
The opinion answered no to representation of either party in the dissolution while the adoption remained pending.
Could a corporation's general-counsel office use a lawyer's letterhead without naming the corporation?
The opinion answered yes for letterhead bearing the lawyer's name, office address, and Attorney at Law designation without the corporation's name.
Did a trust-seminar company's two-thirds fee and management agreement raise ethics problems?
The opinion accepted different-firm lawyers and company office space but identified apparent fee splitting and unauthorized-practice concerns, plus a problem if the management agreement restricted…
Could a deceased business client's lawyer represent the children after a joint estate consultation with the widow?
The opinion barred representation of the children unless the widow consented after full disclosure.
Could a former partner keep control of cases a departing associate took, and how were overlapping fees treated?
The opinion required reasonable fees and no double billing, denied control to the former partner absent client-approved co-counsel status, and placed lawyer choice with the client.
Who would answer a municipal judge's question about a service-related conflict under the judicial code?
The opinion referred the Code of Judicial Conduct question to the Judicial Commission and gave no substantive conflict ruling.
Who could handle an expungement motion after a conflicted prosecutor's office yielded a grand-jury matter?
The opinion said the original prosecutor could not handle the motion to expunge the grand-jury report, but the appointed special prosecutor could.
How did this historical opinion treat ex parte interviews of a represented defendant's managers and scene witness?
It barred contact with all identified employees under then-current Rule 4.2 but allowed locating a person without seeking information; the official source warns the rule's former-employee treatment…
Did a local judge's child joining a firm disqualify that lawyer or other firm members?
The opinion gave no disqualification ruling and referred the judicial-conduct question to the Judicial Commission for the judge to raise.
Could an employee pay counsel's grievance fee when the union owed it but could not pay?
The opinion allowed the employee to pay and seek union reimbursement if the employee waived the Rule 1.8(a) conflict in writing after full disclosure.
Could an assistant prosecutor join a private firm handling cases against the prosecutor's office?
The opinion said yes because Rule 1.11 allowed screening of the former government lawyer, subject to that rule's requirements.
Could appointed juvenile counsel sue a parent who was ordered to pay the fee and signed a contract but defaulted?
The opinion answered yes to suit for the fees and costs on those stated facts.
Could a separate business arrange church will appointments, pay a lawyer hourly, and donate to churches?
The opinion found the proposed arrangement contrary to one or more rules, citing possible conflicts, lawyer-independence, and direct-contact violations depending on its logistics.
What did the opinion require when a client gave counsel a sealed container believed to hold drugs or paraphernalia?
The opinion required return of the container to the client or, with the client's permission, delivery to police or the prosecutor.
Could counsel oppose former client Entity A if the decision changing the legal issue was still appealable?
No. This follow-up to Opinion 930109 said the lawyer could not represent Entity B against A while the decision remained subject to appeal.
Could counsel oppose former client Entity A on the same issue after a court decision changed the legal issues?
The opinion allowed representation of Entity B against A only if the decision establishing the changed legal issues was final, on facts including no usable confidential information from A.
Did the ethics office decide how two lawyers should divide fees for work on one case?
No. The office said it could not determine the disputed facts and could apply the rules only after the parties established those facts.
Could a law student work part time on prosecution cases and at a county municipal-defense firm?
The opinion said no to the proposed simultaneous work in the prosecutor's office and a private firm defending municipal cases in that county.
Was it a conflict to pay financiers of a nonlaw business a share of revenue including the lawyer's practice revenue?
The opinion answered yes to the described revenue-share conflict. It did not identify a particular rule or further analysis.
Could a municipal judge's firm handle municipal cases in other cities?
The opinion found no conflict under lawyers' professional-conduct rules, declined to interpret the judicial code, and warned that substitution for another municipal judge could create conflicts.
Did an insurance agent practice law merely by identifying a client's possible estate-planning need?
The opinion said no if the agent only identified a potential need and suggested legal advice; it declined to assess a broader lawyer-agent relationship without details.
Could a solo lawyer show a legal assistant in a brochure and use a plural practice name?
The opinion allowed the assistant in the brochure with express nonlawyer identification when readers might be confused, but rejected a plural practice name for a single lawyer.
Could a lawyer use a contingent fee in a domestic-relations matter after final dissolution with no support issues left?
The opinion answered yes on the stated facts that dissolution was final and neither alimony nor child support remained at issue.
Could a lawyer use a contingent fee for property distribution after dissolution if maintenance remained pending?
The opinion said no under Rule 1.5(d), even though the dissolution order was final, because maintenance remained at issue.
Could a lawyer withdraw when the client interfered with representation?
The opinion said yes, subject to all requirements of Rule 1.16(d).
Could a nonlawyer serve as secretary of a Missouri professional corporation practicing law?
The opinion answered yes and said Missouri Formal Opinion 102 remained valid despite intervening statute and rule changes.
Could a lawyer take matters adverse to a paralegal's former firm or its clients?
The opinion allowed the matters if the paralegal was screened and shared no former-employment confidences, even when the paralegal had not worked on the particular matter.
Would helping a collection agency set up an in-house lawyer to sue in customers' names assist unauthorized practice?
The opinion answered yes to the proposed system in which the agency hired and paid the lawyer who filed suits for the agency's clients.
Did the office approve a fixed annual fee for unlimited low-income legal services in one practice area?
No. The office declined a general plan-design question and pointed to nonbinding ABA Opinion 87-355 on prepaid legal plans as a starting reference.
Browse Office of Legal Ethics Counsel & Advisory Committee of the Supreme Court of Missouri opinions by topic
Legal ethics opinions from the Office of Legal Ethics Counsel & Advisory Committee of the Supreme Court of Missouri interpret the rules of professional conduct for working lawyers, in response to inquiries from members and committees. Under Missouri Supreme Court Rule 5.30, formal opinions are binding; informal opinions are advisory. Source. Every opinion above has a plain-English question and short answer, plus a link to the original source on the bar's site.