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 include a binding arbitration clause for all lawyer-client disputes in a fee agreement?
The opinion permitted the clause under the then-effective rules, but required the lawyer to point it out orally and explain it as needed for the individual client.
Could a solo lawyer sharing office space with a judge and prosecutor’s firm defend ordinance cases in their municipalities?
The opinion said the described arrangement did not itself bar the defense work. Separate-office identity, telephone handling, and secure client files were needed for the offices to be treated…
Did a grand jury subpoena alone authorize a lawyer to give the IRS a former conservatorship client’s file?
No. The opinion required client consent or a court order; a grand jury subpoena alone was insufficient. It called for full presentation of Rule 4-1.6 confidentiality and a specific, limited order.
Could a lawyer staff a trade-show booth, discuss legal questions, and arrange later consultations?
On the stated facts, the opinion permitted the proposed booth activities, with confidentiality protection and conflict checks before specific advice. The lawyer had to respond only to…
Could a personal-injury lawyer advance taxi fares for a client’s medical appointments?
The opinion said transportation to doctors might be advanceable when directly related to litigation, but advancing travel solely for treatment would violate then-effective Rule 4-1.8(e).
Could counsel for a law-enforcement association represent one member in an association-related suit against another?
On the described circumstances, the opinion found a conflict in representing one member against another on issues concerning the association itself.
Could a firm sue one Missouri state agency while currently representing another state agency?
The opinion found a conflict barring representation against the state or one of its agencies if the state or any agency was a current firm client.
Could a second-year law student take depositions or appear in court while working for a lawyer?
Only if certified under Missouri Supreme Court Rule 13 and within its permitted representation of the state or indigent people. Without certification, the student could do only work any other…
How did the opinion treat small trust balances when clients could not be located?
The lawyer had to keep trying to contact the clients and hold the funds in trust. If they remained unlocated when the escheat statute took effect, the lawyer could follow that statute.
Could a lawyer who completed Rule 17.04 mediator training advertise as a “court-certified” mediator?
No. The opinion said Rule 17.04 did not make trainees court-certified, so that representation would violate Rule 4-7.1.
Could an estate-planning lawyer inform the probate court about an elderly client’s diminished capacity?
The opinion barred disclosure of concerns and observations unless the lawyer was seeking a guardian. It allowed seeking one as a last resort, with action limited to what was needed to protect the client.
How could a lawyer collect a contingent fee when a client would not endorse a judgment check?
The opinion said collection required a court proceeding and the proposed pay-into-court petition did not violate Rule 4. It noted other procedures might also work and suggested fee-dispute…
Could a former judge represent a parent seeking to enforce a visitation order the lawyer entered as judge?
No. The opinion said Rule 4-1.12 barred that representation on the described facts.
Could a former prosecutor defend a probationer in a violation proceeding tied to a case the lawyer’s office prosecuted?
The opinion barred the representation under Rules 4-1.11(a) and 4-1.9(a), including cases handled by the lawyer’s assistants. It said the Rule 4-1.11(a) conflict could be waived.
Could a lawyer give a client file to the lawyer’s insurer before any claim was made and without client consent?
No. On the stated facts, the opinion said disclosure would violate Rule 4-1.6 and the Rule 4-1.6(b)(2) exception did not apply.
Could opposing firms discuss a merger while representing adverse parties in a pending suit?
The opinion said merger discussions created a Rule 4-1.7(b) conflict. They could continue only after full disclosure and client consent; a possible future merger had to be disclosed even if talks stopped.
Could a lawyer tell a business counterparty that the lawyer was considering reporting allegedly fraudulent bills for prosecution?
The opinion allowed a statement of genuinely contemplated reporting and an actual referral to authorities. It barred idle threats of criminal prosecution used to gain negotiating advantage.
Could a lawyer contact a former client who had left an employer about another client’s retaliation suit against that employer?
On the stated facts, the opinion allowed contact with the former client without violating Rule 4-4.2.
Could a firm send its newsletter to clients, former clients, and staff contacts without the Rule 4-7.3 disclaimer?
The opinion allowed that for existing clients and for past clients and staff contacts not known to need the firm’s services.
Could a lawyer serve as guardian ad litem for juveniles while the firm defended adult criminal clients?
As a general rule, the opinion found no conflict in that combination, but said particular circumstances could change the result.
Could a firm lease nonlawyer staff without unilateral power to remove or discipline them for conduct-rule breaches?
No. The opinion required the firm to be able to discipline or end the lease-back of staff who violated professional obligations; the proposed arrangement violated Rules 4-5.4 and 4-5.5.
Could counsel copy an insured accident participant on adjuster correspondence when counsel knew of no lawyer for that person?
The opinion said Rule 4-4.2 did not bar direct contact with a party not known to have counsel, even when an insurance adjuster was involved.
How did the opinion direct a lawyer to hold unclaimed client funds before escheat?
The opinion required reasonable efforts to find the owner. Funds large enough to justify a separate account belonged in a non-IOLTA interest-bearing account, with interest to the owner; smaller…
Was a standard email-consent form alone adequate to explain email confidentiality risks to every client?
The opinion doubted any single form would suffice without further oral discussion. It tied appropriate email use to the client’s setting and the communication’s nature, including interception and…
Could a lawyer association publish an online member directory without a specialization disclaimer?
Truthful basic listings were allowed. Information implying specialization or superior competence triggered a Rule 4-7.4 disclaimer unless a stated exception applied; the effect of honors and…
Could a part-time assistant prosecutor serve as guardian ad litem in juvenile cases involving the juvenile officer?
The opinion found a conflict whenever the Juvenile Officer was an interested party in a case where the assistant prosecutor would serve as guardian ad litem.
Could a lawyer report only earned fees as gross receipts when insurers reported the whole joint settlement check?
The opinion said the lawyer’s proposed reporting approach did not violate Rule 4-1.15. It warned that any approach exposing client or third-party trust funds to the lawyer’s creditors would violate…
Could a contingent-fee agreement split case costs equally between lawyer and nonindigent client if there was no recovery?
Yes. The opinion said the proposed arrangement complied with then-effective Rule 4-1.8(e)(1).
Could separately practicing lawyers share a network that gave everyone access to each other’s client files?
No. The opinion said separate practices must present themselves as separate and keep other office sharers from confidential electronic and paper files, including fax material.
Could a Missouri lawyer partner with an attorney licensed only in a neighboring state and maintain offices in both states?
The opinion said the proposed partnership did not violate Missouri Supreme Court Rule 4 on the stated facts, which included license-state identification on letterhead and avoiding unauthorized practice.
Could a lawyer accept equity in a newly formed client company for legal work?
The opinion allowed the equity interest because the lawyer had complied with Rule 4-1.8(a). It warned that later conflicts could make continued representation of the company impossible.
Could insurance defense counsel follow an insurer’s audit, billing, and flat-fee requests without the insured’s informed consent?
The opinion required the insured’s consent for each described request, after explanation of its effect under Rules 4-1.8(f) and 4-1.4. Without consent or insurer waiver, the lawyer was to withdraw.
Could one guardian ad litem remain for three siblings when one child’s interests conflicted with the others?
The opinion said the lawyer had to seek withdrawal as guardian ad litem for all three and ask the court to appoint a separate guardian ad litem for each.
Could a solo lawyer continue using another lawyer’s firm name after that lawyer left private practice?
No. The opinion said the firm could not use “Pat Doe Law Firm” while Pat Doe was no longer part of the practice.
Could a lawyer continue using a maiden name professionally after changing the legal surname used personally?
Yes. The opinion found no Rule 4 violation and said the lawyer should ensure the professional name was provided to the bar, supreme court clerk, and disciplinary counsel.
Could a client sign and send a client-written request on the lawyer’s firm letterhead?
No. The opinion barred client correspondence on the firm’s letterhead, but allowed the lawyer to send a separate letter saying the lawyer represented the employee.
Could a lawyer consult someone already represented by another lawyer about replacing that lawyer?
The opinion allowed consultation, a new engagement, and help notifying former counsel at the person’s request. It said Rule 4-4.2 did not apply because the lawyer was not representing a client in…
Could a lawyer send a deceased former client’s closed files to counsel for the estate and surviving spouse?
Only if the client consented before death or a court ordered disclosure after the confidentiality issue was fully raised. The opinion called for any order to be specific and limited.
When would a departing associate’s earlier firm work conflict a new firm in workers’ compensation matters?
The opinion said the new firm had a Rule 4-1.10 conflict for matters the associate participated in or learned confidential information about at the former firm, including through informal office…
Could a lawyer who formerly represented a wife later represent her former husband’s new spouse in divorce?
On the stated facts, the opinion found no Rule 4-1.9(b) conflict, but said a conflict would exist if information from the former representation could be used against the former wife.
Could defense counsel discuss settlement history with the plaintiff after the case was dismissed?
The opinion permitted that discussion only once the matter was finally concluded and the defense client consented.
Could a firm hire a legal assistant from a co-defendant’s lawyer without withdrawing from the shared case?
The opinion allowed the firm to continue only if the assistant was completely and effectively screened from all contact with or access to that case. It reserved court disqualification and…
Could a lawyer be a partner in one firm and of counsel to another?
Yes, but the opinion said each firm’s conflicts became the other’s and both firms had to disclose the relationship wherever they presented themselves publicly.
Could a lawyer remove personal impressions and case notes before returning a former client’s file?
On the described facts, the opinion treated the notes as part of the file that had to be provided to the client.
Could one lawyer continue representing probate plaintiffs divided over an aggregate settlement?
The opinion found a conflict and required withdrawal from all plaintiffs unless one group consented to continued representation of the other. Without a decision-making entity, each client decided…
What did this 1998 opinion require before a client chose email for attorney-client communications?
The opinion required an understandable explanation of email communication risks before the client decided to use it. It said the explanation need not be technical.
Could six lawyers’ professional corporations become members of their existing law-firm LLC?
The opinion said the proposed structure would not violate Rule 4 if it complied with applicable statutes and regulations.
Could a prosecutor also represent an estate whose personal representative accepted a Medicaid claim by a state agency?
The opinion allowed continued estate representation if the personal representative knowingly chose not to contest after disclosure and a chance for independent counsel. Any adversity with the…
Could insurance defense counsel limit work to services the insurer would pay for without the insured’s consent?
No. The opinion required informed consent after explaining the limits and their effect. Without consent, counsel could not represent the insured subject to those limits.
Could defense counsel directly interview a parent represented in a related child-abuse order case?
No. On the stated facts, the opinion said Rule 4-4.2 barred direct contact. The constitutional duty of effective assistance did not override the rule; contact could proceed through the parent’s lawyer.
Could a personal-injury lawyer provide cash support to a client’s family during a pending case under this 1998 opinion?
The opinion said then-effective Rule 4-1.8(e) barred loans and other financial aid except advancing litigation costs and expenses. An official note identifies a 2021 amendment.
Did a new partner’s prior firm being opposing counsel automatically disqualify the hiring firm?
On the stated facts, the opinion found no apparent conflict under Rules 4-1.9 and 4-1.10 because the partner had no confidential information about the matter, including from meetings or informal talk.
Could government counsel defend a records suit if the lawyer might be a necessary witness?
The opinion barred the lawyer from trial advocacy if likely to be a necessary witness. Another lawyer could handle trial and pretrial issues involving the first lawyer’s credibility; the first…
Could a former legal secretary prepare injury files for a percentage of the legal fee?
No. The opinion said the proposed percentage arrangement was prohibited fee sharing with a nonlawyer under Rule 4-5.4.
Could screening a lateral associate let a defense firm keep a case the associate had handled for the plaintiff?
No. The opinion said screening did not avoid the imputed conflict. The plaintiff could waive it; otherwise the defense firm had to withdraw before the associate joined.
Could a lawyer testify or produce client files after a judge ordered disclosure over confidentiality objections?
The opinion allowed compliance after confidentiality was fully raised, or available appellate review. It said the lawyer should seek a specific and limited order.
Could lawyers who would testify about a copied will also serve as trial counsel in its probate case?
The opinion said the two witness lawyers should not serve as trial counsel under Rule 4-3.7; another lawyer in the firm could.
Could an out-of-state lawyer maintain a Missouri office solely for immigration representation without Missouri admission?
The opinion said no; the lawyer would need Missouri licensure to maintain such an office for advising and representing clients.
Could a lawyer’s business card say “No recovery, no legal fee” without mentioning client costs?
No. The opinion required a disclaimer that the client might owe costs and expenses. It said any Rule 4-7.2 or 4-7.3 issue from use of the card depended on the circumstances.
May a lawyer place judgment funds held by a clerk during an appeal in an interest-bearing trust account?
The opinion says a separate, interest-bearing, non-IOLTA trust account is appropriate; the interest belongs to the client. It makes the account choice depend in part on expected income compared with…
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.