My firm wants to distribute a publication advertising our services that also carries ads for our non-lawyer business partners (financial planners, realtors, in-home care, and the like). Does including those partner ads violate the advertising rules?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney's firm, which practices eldercare law, estate planning, and real estate law, wished to print and distribute a publication advertising its services. The publication would also include advertisements for the firm's non-lawyer business-partner organizations that provide related services such as financial planning and wealth management, real estate sales, investments, mobility support, and in-home care. The attorney asked whether including those partner advertisements violates the Rules of Professional Conduct. The panel concluded it does not.

The panel explained that attorney advertising is governed by Rules 7.1 through 7.5. Rule 7.2(a) permits advertising services through written communication, which may include information about the lawyer's name, address, services, fees, and other information that might invite the attention of those seeking legal assistance, and Rule 7.4(a) permits communicating the fields in which the lawyer does or does not practice. But under Rule 7.1 (and Rule 7.3(b)(3)) such communications may not contain false or misleading information, including material misrepresentations, undisclosed testimonials or endorsements, or unlabeled dramatizations. The panel noted at the outset that it will not edit documents or approve a document as a whole, so it confined its analysis to whether including the partner ads comports with the rules, proceeding in two steps: the content of the advertisements, and the propriety of including them.

On content, the panel found the business-partner advertisements contained no false or misleading information under Rule 7.1: they had no language or imagery constituting a testimonial about or endorsement of the firm or its services, and none suggested an ability to achieve a particular result or outcome (citing Rule 7.1's comments and Rule 8.4(e)). On inclusion, the panel found the ads comported with Rule 7.2(a), reasoning that Comment [2]'s permission to communicate any "information that might invite the attention of those seeking legal assistance" fairly encompasses information about optional related service providers, and noting in a footnote that this also accords with Rule 7.4(a). The panel emphasized that the partner ads were clearly differentiated, both stylistically and physically within the publication, from information about the law firm (name, location, members, and practice areas), so there was no indication of overlap between the firm and the business partners. It reminded the attorney to subject all future partner advertisements to the same analysis before including them.

In practice

Under this opinion, a Rhode Island firm may carry advertisements for its non-lawyer business partners inside its own advertising publication, provided each partner ad is free of false or misleading content, contains no undisclosed testimonial or endorsement of the firm and no suggestion of a guaranteed result, and is visually and physically separated from the firm's own information so a reader would not conflate the firm with the partners. The panel declined to bless the publication as a whole and directed that each future partner ad be evaluated under the same content-and-separation analysis.

Common questions

Q: Can my firm's advertising flyer include ads for the non-lawyer businesses we partner with?

A: Under this opinion, yes, provided the partner ads are not false or misleading, carry no undisclosed testimonial or endorsement and no suggestion of a particular result, and are clearly differentiated from the firm's own information.

Q: Did the panel approve the whole publication?

A: No. The panel reiterated that it will not edit documents or approve a document as a whole; it limited its opinion to whether including the business-partner advertisements comports with the rules.

Q: What must I do before adding new partner ads later?

A: The panel reminded the attorney to subject all future business-partner advertisements to the same two-step analysis (content, then propriety of inclusion) before including them in any attorney communication.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Rules 7.1 through 7.5 of the Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct, principally Rule 7.1 (false or misleading communications), Rule 7.2(a) (advertising through written communication), Rule 7.3(b)(3) (prohibited content in written solicitations to prospective clients), and Rule 7.4(a) (communicating fields of practice), along with Rule 8.4(e). The analysis distinguishes the content of the third-party ads from the propriety of their inclusion in the firm's publication.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services)
• MR 7.2 (advertising)
• MR 7.3 (solicitation of clients)
• MR 7.4 (communication of fields of practice)
• RI RPC 7.1, 7.2(a), 7.3(b)(3), 7.4(a), 8.4(e)

Statutes:

• None cited.

Cases:

• None cited.

Other opinions cited:

• RI EAP Op. 98-16 and Op. 90-15 (the panel will not edit documents or approve a document as a whole)

See also

• RI EAP Op. 2005-01: Online Lawyer-Matching Website Advertising
• RI EAP Op. 2008-01: Firm Name Under Rule 7.1
• RI EAP Op. 90-25: Advertising and the Rule 7.4 Disclaimer

Source

• Landing page: https://www.courts.ri.gov/attorney-resources/Pages/Ethics-Advisory-Panel-default.aspx
• Original PDF: https://www.courts.ri.gov/Opinions/EAP-2025-03.pdf

Original opinion text

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

Rhode Island Supreme Court
Ethics Advisory Panel Op. 2025-3
Issued March 13, 2025

FACTS

The inquiring attorney is a member of a law firm specializing in eldercare law, estate planning, and real estate law. The firm wishes to print and distribute a publication (the "Publication") advertising the firm's services. Included in the Publication are advertisements for the firm's non-lawyer business partner organizations that provide services related to those offered by the firm such as financial planning and wealth management, real estate sales, investments, mobility support, in-home care, and the like.

ISSUE PRESENTED

The inquiring attorney asks whether the firm's inclusion of business partner organization advertisements in the Publication violates the Rules of Professional Conduct?

OPINION

It is the Panel's opinion that the firm's inclusion of business partner organization advertisements in the Publication does not violate the Rules of Professional Conduct.

REASONING

Attorney advertisements are regulated by Rules 7.1 through 7.5 of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Rule 7.2(a) expressly permits attorneys to "advertise services through written . . communication . . . ." Such communications may contain:

[I]nformation concerning a lawyer's name or firm name, address and telephone number; the kinds of services the lawyer will undertake; the basis on which the lawyer's fees are determined, including prices for specific services and payment and credit arrangements; a lawyer's foreign language ability; names of references and, with their consent, names of clients regularly represented; and other information that might invite the attention of those seeking legal assistance.

Rule 7.2, Comment [2]. Written attorney communications may also "communicate the fact that the lawyer does or does not practice in particular fields of law." Rule 7.4(a). However, at no point may such communications contain or convey "false or misleading [information] about the lawyer or the lawyer's services." Rule 7.1; see also Rule 7.3(b)(3) (prohibiting an attorney from disseminating a written communication to prospective clients if the communication "contains a false, fraudulent, misleading or deceptive statement or claim or is improper under Rule 7.1"). Information is false or misleading within the meaning of Rule 7.1 if it "contains a material misrepresentation of fact or law, or omits a fact necessary to make the statement considered as a whole not materially misleading . . . contains any testimonial about, or endorsement of, the lawyer without identifying the fact that it is a testimonial or endorsement . . . [or] contains a dramatization or simulated description of the lawyer, partners or associates, offices or facilities, or services without identifying the fact that the description is a simulation or dramatization."

As an initial matter, the Panel "will not embark on the task of editing documents and will not therefore give approval to a document as a whole by way of an advisory opinion." Rhode Island Supreme Court Ethics Advisory Panel Op. 98-16.; see also Rhode Island Supreme Court Ethics Advisory Panel Op. 90-15. Rather, the Panel will focus its analysis solely on whether including the business partner organization advertisements in the Publication comports with the Rules of Professional Conduct.

This analysis requires a two (2) step process. First, the Panel will examine the content of the advertisements. Second, the Panel will assess the propriety of including them in the Publication.

The Panel's review of the business partner organization advertisements indicates that the content thereof does not contain any false or misleading information in violation of Rule 7.1. Significantly, the advertisements do not evince any language or imagery constituting a testimonial about or endorsement of the inquiring attorney's firm or the services that may be obtained therefrom. See Rule 7.1, Comment [2] (observing that information may be misleading "if there is a substantial likelihood that it will lead a reasonable person to formulate a specific conclusion about the lawyer or the lawyer's services for which there is no reasonable factual foundation"). Relatedly, none of the business partner organization advertisements indicate or suggest an ability to achieve a particular result or outcome for the reader. See Rule 7.1, Comment [4]; see also Rule 8.4(e).

The Panel further finds that the inclusion of business partner organization advertisements in the Publication comports with Rule 7.2(a). Comment [2] explicitly permits attorneys to communicate any "information that might invite the attention of those seeking legal assistance." This category can be fairly interpreted to encompass information regarding the existence of optional service providers related to the attorney's practice. Concurrently, the advertisements are clearly differentiated, both stylistically and physically within the Publication, from information concerning the inquiring attorney's law firm such as name, location, members, and practice areas, thereby ensuring there is no indication or suggestion of overlap between the law firm and the business partners. See Rule 7.3(b)(3).

For these reasons, the Panel concludes that the inclusion of business partner organization advertisements in the Publication does not run afoul of the Rules of Professional Conduct. In reaching this conclusion, the Panel reminds the inquiring attorney that he or she should subject all future business partner organization advertisements to the analysis articulated herein before including them in any attorney communication like the Publication.

[Footnote 1: In this way, the inclusion of the business partner organization advertisements also accords with Rule 7.4(a) allowing the inquiring attorney to identify his or her law firm's specific areas of practice.]