May a law firm let its name appear on an automobile association's law list of recommended attorneys for the association's insureds to use in litigation?

Plain-English summary

An automobile association that owned and operated a casualty insurance company published a law list of recommended attorneys for its member-assureds to use. A firm of Oklahoma lawyers was solicited to allow its name to appear on that list, as among those recommended for use by the member-assureds in the event of Oklahoma litigation involving membership in or insurance by the association-insurance company. The firm asked whether accepting the listing would be proper.

The Committee concluded it would not be proper. Although it found the language of ABA Canon 27 not absolutely clear, it believed a proper construction of that Canon would preclude the listing, and it noted that the ABA's Committee on Law Listings had not approved the particular law list. The Committee added that similar questions had been presented to the State Bar of Oklahoma before and decided the same way, quoting Advisory Opinion No. 124 (Nov. 1936 Oklahoma Bar Journal) that a publication whose primary purpose is not a listing of lawyers, or which carries a roll of lawyers as an adjunct to other matters not addressed to the profession, is not a "Reputable Law Directory" or "Reputable Law List." It also cited Opinions Nos. 96 and 98 to the same effect.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1950, under the ABA Canons of Professional Ethics and decades before Oklahoma adopted the Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct (1988) and the later Ethics 2000 revisions. The advertising and law-list restraints applied here also predate Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977), which held that categorical bans on lawyer advertising violate the First Amendment, and the modern rules permit lawyer-referral and group-listing arrangements that the Canons forbade. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Why was the listing improper?

A: The Committee read ABA Canon 27 to preclude it and noted that the ABA's Committee on Law Listings had not approved the particular law list.

Q: Did Oklahoma have prior authority on the point?

A: Yes. The Committee cited Advisory Opinions Nos. 124, 96, and 98, which had decided similar law-list questions the same way.

Background and rules framework

The opinion construed ABA Canon 27 (advertising and law lists) of the Canons of Professional Ethics, then governing Oklahoma practice, together with the ABA Committee on Law Listings' non-approval of the list. It relied on Oklahoma Advisory Opinions Nos. 96, 98, and 124. It predates the Model Rules and made no Model Rule citation.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• ABA Canon 27 (Canons of Professional Ethics): restrictions on advertising and law lists.

Other opinions cited:

• Oklahoma Advisory Opinion No. 124 (Nov. 1936 Oklahoma Bar Journal): defining "Reputable Law Directory" and "Reputable Law List."
• Oklahoma Advisory Opinions Nos. 96 (Nov. 22, 1935) and 98 (Dec. 26, 1935).

See also

• Okla. Bar Ethics Op. 132: Postal cards advertising brief-writing to other lawyers
• Okla. Bar Ethics Op. 133: Revised professional card in a city directory

Source

• Landing page: https://www.okbar.org/ethics/ethics-opinion-no-143/

Original opinion text

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

March 8, 1950

Advertising – Law List of Automobile Association.

Firm of lawyers could not properly permit automobile association, which owned and operated a casualty insurance company, and which published a law list of recommended attorneys to be used by insureds to publish law firm's name in the list of recommended attorneys for use by insureds in event of litigation.

THE FACTS

An Automobile Association which owns and operates a casualty insurance company publishes a law list of recommended attorneys to be used by the member-assureds of the association-insurance company. A firm of Oklahoma lawyers has been solicited to allow its name to be published in such list as among those recommended for use by said member-assureds in the event of litigation in Oklahoma involving or arising out of membership in or insurance by said association-insurance company. The firm of Oklahoma lawyers so solicited has asked advice as to whether such listing would be proper.

QUERY

Would it be proper under the above stated circumstances for the Oklahoma lawyers to accept a listing in the aforesaid list of recommended attorneys?

ANSWER

It is the opinion of the Committee that the listing would not be proper. Although the language of Canon 27 of the American Bar Association is not absolutely clear on the question, we believe a proper construction of that Canon would preclude the listing. Moreover, the Committee on Law Listings of the American Bar Association has not approved the particular law list in question. In addition, the Committee points out that similar questions have been heretofore presented to the State Bar of Oklahoma and decided in accordance with the above. For instance, Advisory Opinion No. 124, appearing in the November, 1936, Oklahoma Bar Journal, contains the following language:

"A publication, the primary purpose of which is not a listing of lawyers, or which contains a roll of lawyers as an adjunct to other matters not addressed to the profession, is not within the term of 'Reputable Law Directory', or 'Reputable Law List'."

See, also, Opinion No. 96, November 22, 1935, reported in Advisory Opinions Volume 1, page 168, and Opinion No. 98, December 26, 1935, to the same effect.