OHBPC 1988-02-12

Could a law firm periodically send newsletters on general points of law to its established clients?

Short answer: The Board concluded that a law firm could ethically send newsletters on general points of law to its established clients, so long as the newsletters contained no false, fraudulent, misleading, or deceptive statement or claim, applying former DR 2-101(A) and the false-or-misleading definition in DR 2-101(C). The opinion interprets the former Ohio Code of Professional Responsibility, since superseded.

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 Not binding precedent.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 at the bottom of this page, or PDF in the sidebar) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

View original ethics opinion (PDF)

Ohio BPC Opinion 88-001: Law Firm Newsletters to Established Clients

Short answer: The Board concluded that a law firm could ethically send periodic newsletters on general points of law to its established clients, provided the newsletters contained no false, fraudulent, misleading, or deceptive statement or claim, applying former DR 2-101(A) and the false-or-misleading definition in DR 2-101(C).

Disclaimer: This is an advisory ethics opinion. Advisory opinions are not binding; they interpret the Ohio Board of Professional Conduct's rules of professional conduct and are persuasive authority. This summary is for research purposes only and is not legal advice. Verify current rules before acting on any specific guidance.

About this page: The plain-English summary and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official opinion. The opinion text is reproduced at the bottom; the official source (linked) controls.

View original opinion

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1988 under the former Ohio Code of Professional Responsibility, which was superseded by the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct effective February 1, 2007. The Board's status list also flags subsequent rule amendments to DR 2-101 effective January 1, 1993 and August 16, 1993, and cross-references Opinion 92-20. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against the current Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct (including Ohio Prof. Cond. R. 7.1) before relying on any specific rule mentioned here.

Plain-English summary

A law firm asked whether it could periodically send newsletters to its established clients on general points of law, with the newsletters stating that they were not to be construed as legal advice or detailed expositions of the law. The Board concluded that such newsletters were not prohibited under the Code of Professional Responsibility.

The Board grounded the limit in former DR 2-101(A), which barred a lawyer from using any form of communication containing a false, fraudulent, misleading, or deceptive statement or claim. The Board set out the DR 2-101(C) definition of a false or misleading communication, which reached communications that contain a material misrepresentation or omit a necessary fact, are likely to create an unjustified expectation about results, or are subjectively self-laudatory or make unsubstantiated comparisons with other lawyers. The Board concluded that, as long as the newsletter's contents were not false or misleading as so defined, sending it to established clients was ethically permissible.

Common questions

Q: Could a firm send legal-update newsletters to its clients?

A: Yes. The Board concluded a firm could send newsletters on general points of law to established clients, provided the contents were not false, fraudulent, misleading, or deceptive.

Q: What made such a newsletter improper?

A: Under former DR 2-101(C), content that contained a material misrepresentation, omitted a necessary fact, created an unjustified expectation about results, or made unsubstantiated comparisons with other lawyers would be false or misleading.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies former DR 2-101(A) and DR 2-101(C) of the Ohio Code of Professional Responsibility, governing communications about a lawyer's services and the standard for false or misleading communications. The current parallel provisions are Ohio Prof. Cond. R. 7.1 and Model Rule 7.1.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

Former DR 2-101(A), Ohio Code of Professional Responsibility
Former DR 2-101(C), Ohio Code of Professional Responsibility

Source

Landing page: https://ohioadvop.org/advisory-opinion-index/
Original PDF: https://www.ohioadvop.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Op-88-001.pdf

Original opinion text

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

The Supreme Court of Ohio
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES AND DISCIPLINE
41 SOUTH HIGH STREET-SUITE 3370, COLUMBUS, OH 43215-6105
(614) 644-5800 FAX: (614) 644-5804

OFFICE OF SECRETARY

OPINION 88-001
Issued: February 12, 1988

[CPR Opinion-provides advice under the Ohio Code of Professional Responsibility which is superseded by the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct, eff. 2/1/2007.]

[Not current-subsequent rule amendments to DR 2-101, eff. Jan. 1, 1993 an Aug. 16, 1993, See Op. 92-20.]

SYLLABUS: A law firm may ethically send out newsletters to established clients on general points of law as long as such newsletters do not contain false, fraudulent, misleading or deceptive statements or claims.

OPINION: We have before us a request for an informal advisory opinion on whether a law firm may periodically send out newsletters to established clients on general points of law. The request letter states that the newsletters would emphasize that they are not to be construed as either legal advice or detailed expostulations of the law.

It is our opinion that such newsletters are not prohibited under the Code of Professional Responsibility. There are however, limitations on the type of communication a lawyer may use. These limitations are found in DR 2-101(A) which states: "a lawyer shall not, ... use, or participate in the use of, any form of communication containing a false, fraudulent, misleading, or deceptive statement or claim." A communication is considered false or misleading if it:

(1) contains a material misrepresentation of fact or law, or omits a fact necessary to make the statement considered as a whole not materially misleading;

(2) is likely to create an unjustified expectation about results the lawyer can achieve or states or implies that the lawyer can achieve results by means that violate the Code of Professional Responsibility or other law; or

(3) is subjectively self-laudatory, or compares a lawyer's services with other lawyers' services, unless the comparison can be factually substantiated. Code of Professional Responsibility DR 2-101(C).

In conclusion, it is our opinion and you are so advised that, as long as the contents of the newsletter are not considered false or misleading, as defined above, it is ethically permissible to send such a newsletter to established clients.

This is an informal, non-binding advisory opinion, based upon the facts as presented and limited to questions arising under the Code of Professional Responsibility.