May a lawyer run a classified newspaper ad offering to prepare income tax returns and purchase refund claims?

Plain-English summary

The committee was shown a classified advertisement in a state newspaper reading, "Income Tax returns prepared and refund claims purchased by John Doe, Blank Building." Mr. Doe was a bar member practicing at that address. The question was whether the advertisement was permitted under the canons.

The committee held it was not, as a clear violation of Canon 27, which prohibits advertisement by bar members directly or indirectly. It said the fact that laymen perform the same service and advertise their availability is irrelevant, noting that a similar ad by a layman had appeared in the same classified column. When the service is performed by attorneys it constitutes the practice of law, and the omission of any designation of his profession in no way mitigated the offense. The committee cited OBA Opinion No. 196 and American Bar Memorandum Opinion No. 29A.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1960, decades before Oklahoma replaced its original Rules of Professional Conduct (patterned on the ABA Canons of Professional Ethics) with the Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct (adopted 1988) and the later Ethics 2000 revisions. The advertising prohibitions underlying the opinion no longer reflect current law: the United States Supreme Court held in Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977), that categorical bans on truthful lawyer advertising violate the First Amendment, and lawyer communications are governed by different rules today. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Could a lawyer advertise income-tax preparation in the classified section?

A: No. The committee held the ad was a clear violation of Canon 27's bar on direct or indirect advertising.

Q: Did it matter that laymen run the same kind of ad?

A: No. The committee said that was irrelevant, because when an attorney performs the service it constitutes the practice of law.

Q: Did leaving his profession off the ad help?

A: No. The committee said the omission of any designation of his profession in no way mitigated the offense.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied Canon 27 of the Canons of Professional Ethics, adopted in Oklahoma, which prohibits advertisement by bar members, to a lawyer's classified ad for tax services. It relied on the committee's Opinion No. 196 and on ABA Memorandum Opinion No. 29A. The opinion predates the Model Rules and made no Model Rule citation.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Canon 27 (ABA Canons of Professional Ethics, adopted by the Oklahoma Bar): prohibits advertisement by bar members directly or indirectly.

Other opinions cited:

• Oklahoma Opinion No. 196 (1959): newspaper "Income Tax Service" advertising violates Canon 27.
• ABA Memorandum Opinion No. 29A: tax work performed by an attorney is the practice of law.

See also

• Okla. Bar Ethics Op. 196: Newspaper "Income Tax Service" ads omitting attorney status
• Okla. Bar Ethics Op. 164: Newspaper income-tax preparation notice
• Okla. Bar Ethics Op. 174: Tax leaflet mailed to clients as solicitation

Source

• Landing page: https://www.okbar.org/ethics/ethics-opinion-no-205/

Original opinion text

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

Adopted August 11, 1960

The Executive Council has submitted to the Legal Ethics Committee the following inquiry:

INQUIRY

The following advertisement appeared in the classified section of a state newspaper:

“Income Tax returns prepared and refund claims purchased by John Doe, Blank Building”

Mr. Doe is a member of the Bar engaging in the practice at the address stated. Is such advertisement permitted under the Canons of Ethics?

OPINION

We are of the opinion that it is not permitted in that it constitutes a clear violation of Canon 27 which prohibits advertisement by members of the Bar directly or indirectly. The fact that laymen perform this same service and advertise their availability so to do is irrelevant. (In the present case a similar ad by a layman appeared in the same column of the classified section.) When this service is performed by attorneys, it constitutes the practice of law and the omission of the designation of his profession in no way mitigates the offense. See OBA Opinions 196 and American Bar Memorandum Opinion No. 29A.