Can a Mississippi lawyer submit a captioned photo to the newspaper publicizing a personal-injury verdict or settlement?

Plain-English summary

The Committee addressed a lawyer who, after a personal-injury lawsuit ended in a settlement or a jury award for the plaintiff, wanted to take a photo of himself and the plaintiff to the local newspaper with a caption describing the suit, how it concluded, and the result. No accompanying story would run with the picture. The question was whether doing this, after either a settlement or a verdict, was ethical.

The opinion applied Rule 7.1, which bars a deceptive or misleading communication about the lawyer or the lawyer's services, including any statement likely to create an unjustified expectation about the results the lawyer can achieve. The opinion concluded the practice violates the Rules of Professional Conduct: the submission to the newspaper is a direct attempt to promote an expectation that the lawyer will be successful again in similar matters for other clients. Because the lawyer is not also offering to publicize his losses, the opinion reasoned, the communication creates an unjustified expectation about results and is therefore misleading.

In practice

The opinion holds that submitting a captioned photo or story to a newspaper to publicize a favorable verdict or settlement is prohibited under Rule 7.1. Per the opinion, the analysis turns on whether the communication creates an unjustified expectation about the results the lawyer can achieve; selectively publicizing wins (without losses) does so and makes the communication misleading.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer publicize a courtroom win or settlement in the newspaper?

A: The opinion concluded no, where the lawyer submits a captioned photo touting the result. It treated that as a misleading communication under Rule 7.1 because it creates an unjustified expectation about results.

Q: Does it matter whether the case settled or went to verdict?

A: Per the opinion, no. The Committee reached the same conclusion for both a settlement and a jury verdict.

Q: Why is publicizing a real result considered misleading?

A: The opinion reasoned that promoting only favorable outcomes, without also publicizing losses, creates an unjustified expectation that the lawyer will achieve similar results for other clients.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Mississippi Rule of Professional Conduct 7.1 (cf. Model Rule 7.1), which prohibits false or misleading communications about a lawyer or the lawyer's services, including statements likely to create an unjustified expectation about results. The opinion applied that standard to a lawyer-submitted newspaper photo announcing a case result.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct (Mississippi; cf. Model Rules):

• MRPC 7.1 (no false or misleading communications; unjustified expectations about results) (cf. Model Rule 7.1).

See also

• MS Bar Ethics Op. 182: Blind Advertising
• MS Bar Ethics Op. 175: Informational Cards via Union

Source

• Landing page: https://www.msbar.org/ethics-discipline/ethics-opinions/formal-opinions/168/
• Original PDF: https://www.msbar.org/media/1048/et_op_168-amended.pdf

Original opinion text

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

ETHICS OPINION NO. 168

OF THE MISSISSIPPI BAR

RENDERED December 15, 1989

AMENDED April 06, 2013

ADVERTISING -- After winning or settling a personal injury lawsuit, a lawyer may not submit to the newspaper a captioned personal photograph or story concerning the verdict or settlement.

The Ethics Committee of the Mississippi Bar has been requested to render an opinion on the following hypothetical facts:

Lawyer A is involved in a personal injury lawsuit which concludes with a settlement or concludes with a jury award for the Plaintiff. Subsequent to the conclusion of the lawsuit, Lawyer A takes a picture of the Plaintiff and himself to the local newspaper, along with a caption to go under the photo, describing the lawsuit and the manner of conclusion, along with the results. No accompanying story attends the picture.

Is it ethical in either scenario, being either a settlement or a jury verdict, for Lawyer A to take such a photo to a newspaper and request that it be printed?

Rule 7.1 of the Rules of Professional Conduct provides that a lawyer may not make a deceptive or misleading communication about the lawyer or the lawyer's services, including any statement that "is likely to create an unjustified expectation about the results the lawyer can achieve."

The hypothetical practice violates the Rules of Professional Conduct. The submissions to the newspaper are direct attempts to promote an expectation that the lawyer will be successful again (if indeed the verdict or settlement represented an unqualified success) in handling similar matters for other clients. The creation of an unjustified expectation about the results the lawyer can achieve -- the lawyer is not offering to publicize his or her losses as well -- renders the communication misleading.