Can a Mississippi lawyer distribute informational cards to union members through the union, with the lawyer's name and contact information on them?

Plain-English summary

The Committee addressed a lawyer or firm that wanted to arrange with a union to distribute, through the union's officers, a card to workers at a plant site. The card would give general advice on protecting one's rights after a workplace injury (notify the employer and union, request medical treatment while reserving the right to choose a physician, record witnesses, ask the union or local bar to recommend an experienced Worker's Compensation lawyer, and get advice before giving a statement), with the lawyer's or firm's name, address, and phone number prominently displayed and a calendar on the reverse.

The opinion concluded the proposed conduct is not materially different from advertising or direct-mail solicitation, both of which are permissible under the Mississippi Rules of Professional Conduct, and is therefore permissible.

The opinion added two limits. Mississippi Rule 7.2(i) would prohibit paying the union a fee for disbursing the card, but would not prohibit reimbursing the union's expenses in making the distribution. And any written materials must not include false or misleading statements and must comply with the other applicable requirements of Rules 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, 7.6, and 7.7.

In practice

The opinion holds that distributing such informational cards through a union is permissible advertising. Per the opinion, the two operative constraints are that the lawyer may not pay the union a fee for distribution (reimbursement of the union's actual expenses is allowed under Rule 7.2(i)), and that the materials must be free of false or misleading statements and otherwise comply with the advertising and solicitation rules in the 7-series.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer hand out informational cards to workers through their union?

A: The opinion concluded yes. It treated the arrangement as not materially different from advertising or direct-mail solicitation, both permitted under the Mississippi rules.

Q: Can the lawyer pay the union for distributing the cards?

A: Per the opinion, no. Rule 7.2(i) prohibits paying the union a fee for disbursement, though it does not prohibit reimbursing the union's actual distribution expenses.

Q: Are there limits on what the cards can say?

A: The opinion concluded the materials must not include false or misleading statements and must comply with the applicable requirements of Rules 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, 7.6, and 7.7.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets the Mississippi advertising and solicitation rules (the 7-series, cf. Model Rules 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3). It relied specifically on Mississippi Rule 7.2(i), which addresses payments connected to distributing a lawyer's services, allowing reimbursement of distribution expenses but not a fee, and noted that the materials must satisfy the no-false-or-misleading standard along with the other 7-series requirements.

Citations and references

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

• MRPC 7.2, including 7.2(i) (advertising; payments for distribution) (cf. Model Rule 7.2).
• MRPC 7.1 (no false or misleading communications) (cf. Model Rule 7.1).
• MRPC 7.3 (solicitation) (cf. Model Rule 7.3); the opinion also cited Rules 7.4, 7.5, 7.6, and 7.7.

See also

• MS Bar Ethics Op. 182: Blind Advertising
• MS Bar Ethics Op. 179: Non-Lawyer Consultant on Letterhead

Source

• Landing page: https://www.msbar.org/ethics-discipline/ethics-opinions/formal-opinions/175/
• Original PDF: https://www.msbar.org/media/1050/et_op_175-amended.pdf

Original opinion text

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

ETHICS OPINION NO. 175

OF THE MISSISSIPPI BAR

RENDERED September 07, 1990

AMENDED April 06, 2013

ADVERTISING/COMMUNICATION OF FIELDS OF PRACTICE: A lawyer may distribute a card giving general advice and featuring prominently the name, address and telephone number of the lawyer.

An opinion was requested on the following hypothetical:

A lawyer or law firm requests or enters into an agreement with a union or other organization to distribute to union members or other workers at a plant site, through the union's officers or representatives, a card or other materials containing information like the following together with the lawyer's or law firm's name, address and phone number in prominent letterings:

TO PROTECT YOUR RIGHTS IF YOU ARE INJURED ON THE JOB.

1. Notify your employer and union representative immediately.

2. Request medical treatment if needed, but reserve your right to choose your own physician.

3. Write down the names and addresses of all witnesses.

4. Ask your union representative or local bar association to recommend a lawyer who is experienced in handling Worker's Compensation claims if your employer fails to provide medical treatment or compensation benefits required under the Mississippi Worker's Compensation Law

5. Obtain union or legal advice before giving a statement to anyone.

Contained on the other side of the literature or card would be the lawyer's or law firm's name in large letters, together with a calendar.

The proposed conduct is not materially different from advertising or direct mail solicitation, both of which are permissible under the Mississippi Rules of Professional Conduct. Therefore, the proposed conduct is permissible.

Rule 7.2(i) would prohibit payment of a fee to the union for disbursement of the card, but would not prohibit reimbursement of any expenses incurred by the union in making the distribution. Of course, any written materials distributed must not include false or misleading statements and must comply with any other applicable requirements of Rules 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, 7.6 and 7.7 of the Mississippi Rules of Professional Conduct.