Can a lawyer donate legal services to a charity to be auctioned off to the highest bidder as a fundraiser?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1980. Ask about yours and see what the current New York Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
The committee considered whether a lawyer could donate legal services to a charitable organization that would auction them to the highest bidder as a fundraising device. It first set aside, as beyond its jurisdiction, whether the auction was a solicitation prohibited by Judiciary Law section 479 (noting that if it were, it would violate DR 2-103(A) and be unethical).
Whether or not the auction was improper solicitation, the committee found a separate problem: a lawyer who has committed his services to be auctioned cannot exercise the professional judgment required in deciding to accept a client. The Code requires a lawyer to weigh factors about the client and the matter before undertaking representation, and most obviously to accept only matters he is or intends to become competent to handle (EC 6-1; see EC 2-30, DR 2-109, DR 6-101). In an auction the lawyer agrees to represent the winning bidder without knowing whether the matter exceeds his competence, and the bidder commits to pay without knowing whether meaningful services can be provided.
The committee also found the arrangement improper under DR 2-103(B), which bars giving anything of value to a third party for obtaining the lawyer's employment. Citing ABA Inf. 1288 (1974), which disapproved a lawyer preparing wills where members paid his fee to their church, it found the lawyer here would be directing payment of his fee to the organization in return for obtaining a client (see DR 2-103(C)). Finally, it observed that offering legal services as a fundraising device is not an appropriate way to publicize a lawyer (cf. DR 2-101(C) and (D)) and tends to confuse the intelligent selection of counsel with the organization's fundraising goals. The question was answered in the negative.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1980, before New York replaced the Code of Professional Responsibility with the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2009 (payment for recommending a lawyer is now governed by Rule 7.2 and competence by Rule 1.1) and before later changes to the law of lawyer advertising and solicitation. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.
Common questions
Q: Can a lawyer auction off donated legal services for a charity fundraiser?
A: No. The committee held the practice improper, both because the lawyer cannot screen the matter for competence and because directing the fee to the charity that obtained the employment violates DR 2-103(B).
Q: What is the competence problem with an auction?
A: The committee found the lawyer agrees to represent the winning bidder without knowing whether the matter is within his competence, contrary to EC 6-1's requirement to accept only matters he can competently handle.
Q: Why is paying the fee to the charity a problem?
A: The committee read it as giving something of value to a third party for obtaining the lawyer's employment, which DR 2-103(B) prohibits, citing ABA Inf. 1288 (1974).
Background and rules framework
The opinion applied DR 2-103(A)-(C) (solicitation and giving value for obtaining employment), DR 2-101(C) and (D) (publicity), and the competence-screening provisions of EC 6-1, DR 2-109, and DR 6-101, to a charity auction of legal services. The closest current Model Rule analogues are Rule 7.2 (payment for recommending a lawyer's services) and Rule 1.1 (competence).
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- MR 7.2 (advertising; payment for recommendations)
- MR 1.1 (competence)
- NY EC 2-30, EC 6-1, DR 2-101(C), DR 2-101(D), DR 2-103(A)-(C), DR 2-109, DR 6-101
Statutes:
- N.Y. Judiciary Law sec. 479 (solicitation)
Other opinions cited:
- ABA Inf. 1288 (1974): improper to route a lawyer's fee to an organization obtaining the employment
See also
- NY State Bar Op. 549: Referrals with a lawyer-owned collection agency
- NY State Bar Op. 540: Advertising in bar association pamphlets
Source
- Landing page: https://nysba.org/opinion-524/
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 1980. Ezel checks the current New York Rules of Professional Conduct against your situation and cites the rules it relies on.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace