Can a lawyer appear on a TV news feature explaining bankruptcy law to the public?

Plain-English summary

A lawyer was asked to be part of a feature story on a local TV news station about bankruptcy and the legal aspects of filing it, commenting on exemptions, the mechanics of filing, the general effects of bankruptcy on a person's credit reputation, and the fees typically charged. The broadcast was to be a news feature with no suggestion that the lawyer was soliciting clients or holding himself out as specializing in bankruptcy law.

The opinion looks to ABA Informal Opinion 1464 (Nov. 10, 1980), which addressed similar conduct involving public-service columns on areas of general legal interest, and which recognized (going back to 1928) that a lawyer may give general information about the law so long as he does not purport to give advice to particular persons about their individual rights or emphasize his own experience or reputation. Applying the Mississippi rules, the opinion notes that Rule 7.1(b) prohibits creating an unjustified, false, or misleading expectation about results; Rule 7.2(i) prohibits giving anything of value for recommending the lawyer's services; and Rule 7.3 prohibits in-person, live-telephone, or real-time electronic solicitation of a prospective client with no prior relationship. Because none of those prohibitions appeared to be implicated by the proposed broadcast, the opinion concludes the lawyer's participation would not violate the Mississippi Rules of Professional Conduct.

Currency note

The official header records “RENDERED September 17, 1982” and “AMENDED April 06, 2013” (opinion text). This page reproduces the amended version. Later rule amendments or opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify current rules before relying on a specific requirement.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer go on a TV news segment to explain how bankruptcy works?

A: Yes. The opinion concludes that participating in such a news feature does not violate the Mississippi Rules of Professional Conduct, because it gives general legal information rather than soliciting clients.

Q: What would make a media appearance cross the line?

A: The opinion draws on ABA Informal Opinion 1464's principle that a lawyer may give general information but may not purport to advise particular persons about their individual rights or emphasize his own experience or reputation.

Q: Which rules did the Committee check?

A: Rule 7.1(b) (misleading expectations about results), Rule 7.2(i) (giving value for recommendations), and Rule 7.3 (in-person and real-time solicitation). The opinion found none of them implicated by the broadcast.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Mississippi Rule of Professional Conduct 7.1(b) (false or misleading communications about the lawyer's services; Model Rule 7.1), Rule 7.2(i) (advertising; giving something of value for a recommendation; Model Rule 7.2), and Rule 7.3 (solicitation of clients; Model Rule 7.3). It relies on ABA Informal Opinion 1464 and the longstanding principle that lawyers may publish or broadcast general legal information without giving individualized advice.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.1 / MS RPC 7.1(b) (unjustified, false, or misleading expectations about results)
• MR 7.2 / MS RPC 7.2(i) (giving anything of value for recommending the lawyer's services)
• MR 7.3 / MS RPC 7.3 (in-person, telephone, or real-time electronic solicitation)

Other opinions cited:

• ABA Informal Opinion 1464 (Nov. 10, 1980): a lawyer may provide general legal information to the public without giving individualized advice
• ABA Informal Opinion 538 (1962); Canon 40, Canons of Professional Ethics: lawyers may write articles giving general legal information

See also

No sibling opinions yet indexed.

Source

• Landing page: https://web.archive.org/web/20210430095338/https://www.msbar.org/ethics-discipline/ethics-opinions/formal-opinions/74/
• Original PDF: https://web.archive.org/web/20210511205530/https://www.msbar.org/media/1089/et_op_74-amended.pdf
• Note: The Mississippi Bar no longer hosts its ethics opinions on a public page; it now provides them to members through vLex Fastcase (Bar ethics opinions page). The links above are Internet Archive copies of the Bar's own pages.

Original opinion text

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

ETHICS OPINION NO. 74

OF THE MISSISSIPPI BAR

RENDERED September 17, 1982

AMENDED April 06, 2013

ADVERTISING - Propriety of Attorney's Appearance on Public Service Newscast.

The Ethics Committee of The Mississippi Bar has received a proper request for the rendition of an opinion concerning the following hypothesized conduct, to wit:

The attorney has been asked to be part of a feature story on a local T.V. news station concerning bankruptcy and the legal aspects for filing the same. He was asked to comment on various aspects of the exemptions entitled to bankrupts, the mechanics of filing the bankruptcy itself, the effects generally of taking bankruptcy upon a person's credit reputation, and some aspect of the fees that are generally charged the bankrupts.

The format of the broadcast was to be a feature story on local evening news with no suggestions concerning solicitation of clients or that the attorney held himself as specializing in the field of bankruptcy law.

The American Bar Association Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility in Informal Opinion 1464 rendered November 10, 1980, addressed conduct very similar to the hypothesized conduct presented here. There, the question was the use of public service columns on areas of legal general interest. The ABA Committee opined passing on the issue presented to it in part as follows:

As early as 1928, the American Bar Association recognized that a lawyer may, with ethical propriety, write articles for newspaper publication in which he gives information about the law, so long as he does not thereby purport to give advice to particular persons about their individual rights. Canon 40, Canon's of Professional Ethics: Informal Opinion 538 (1962) . . . The Model Code of Professional Responsibility, as adopted in 1969, also recognized the propriety and desirability of articles by lawyers for publication in lay periodicals to educate members of the public to recognize legal problems, so long as the lawyers do not emphasize their own experience or reputation and do not undertake to give individual advice. DR2-104(A) (4); EC2-5; EC2-5.

Rule 7.1(b), MRPC, prohibits lawyers from creating an unjustified, false or misleading expectation about results the lawyer can achieve. Rule 7.2(i), MRPC, prohibits lawyers from giving anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer's services. Rule 7.3, MRPC, prohibits lawyers from soliciting professional employment by in-person live telephone or real-time electronic contact from a particular prospective client with whom the lawyer has no family, close personal, or prior professional relationship. Since none of these prohibitions seems to be implicated in the proposed television broadcast, the lawyer's participation would not violate the Mississippi Rules of Professional Conduct.