NYSBA January 13, 2012

Can a lawyer pay a marketing firm based on the number of clients it introduces?

Short answer: No. Under Rule 7.2, a lawyer may pay the reasonable cost of marketing, but may not tie a marketing firm's compensation to the number of potential or actual clients it introduces, because that gives the firm a stake in the volume of business.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 2012. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current New York Rules of Professional Conduct, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 2012
Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later opinions or rule amendments may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

Plain-English summary

A collection attorney proposed contracting with a marketing firm that would introduce the attorney to its network of doctors so the attorney could seek collection work from them. The attorney preferred not to pay a flat fee and asked whether compensation could instead be based on the contacts the firm developed (paragraph 1).

The committee held that Rule 7.2 permits a lawyer to pay the reasonable cost of advertising and marketing services, but not to compensate a marketer in a way tied to the number of clients introduced. Compensation keyed to the volume of business developed is improper because it gives the marketing firm a pecuniary interest in the success of the solicitation, which can lead to hard-sell tactics or other improprieties. The committee relied on its prior opinions barring payment for "leads" and commission-style or percentage-of-volume compensation (citing N.Y. State 779 and N.Y. State 565).

In practice

The opinion holds that, under New York Rule 7.2, a lawyer may pay for legitimate marketing services but may not structure the marketer's pay around the number of potential or actual clients it brings in. The committee made the controlling concern the marketer's pecuniary interest in the volume of business: compensation measured by contacts or clients developed effectively pays for clients and risks the hard-sell tactics the rule guards against. A flat or reasonable fixed cost for the marketing service itself is the permissible structure the opinion contrasts with the proposed per-contact arrangement.

Common questions

Q: Can I pay a marketing company per client or per lead it sends me?

A: No. The committee held a lawyer may not base compensation to a marketing firm on the number of potential or actual clients introduced, because that gives the firm a stake in the volume of business (paragraph 1; conclusion).

Q: Can I pay for marketing services at all?

A: Yes. Rule 7.2 permits paying the reasonable cost of advertising and marketing services; the problem is tying that pay to clients or contacts developed rather than to the service itself.

Q: Why does volume-based pay matter?

A: Because, per the opinions the committee cites, a commission or percentage based on volume gives the marketer a pecuniary interest in the success of the solicitation and may lead to hard-sell tactics or other improprieties (N.Y. State 565).

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets New York Rule 7.2 (payment for recommending or marketing a lawyer's services), corresponding to ABA Model Rule 7.2. The rule allows paying the reasonable cost of advertising but not paying a person for channeling clients; the committee applied that line to a proposal to compensate a marketer by the contacts it produced.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • MR 7.2 / NY Rule 7.2: payment for advertising and marketing; bar on paying for client volume

Other opinions cited:

  • N.Y. State 779 (2004): improper to pay a marketing organization for bundles of "leads" to potential clients
  • N.Y. State 565 (1984): commission or percentage based on volume is improper; risks hard-sell tactics

See also

Source

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 2012 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current New York Rules of Professional Conduct and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.