My firm runs free public seminars on a field of law and advertises them in a statewide newspaper. The ad touts one legal instrument over another but carries the RI specialization disclaimer. Does it comply with Rule 7.1?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney's law firm conducted free informational seminars for the general public on a certain field of law, advertised in a newspaper of statewide circulation. The ad contained statements about the merits and advantages of using one particular type of legal instrument over another, gave the dates and locations of the seminars and the names of the lawyers responsible for its content, and included language stating that Rhode Island has no procedure for certification or recognition of specialization by lawyers. The attorney asked whether the ad conformed with Rule 7.1.

The Panel set out Rule 7.1, which requires that statements about a lawyer's services be truthful and governs all forms of communication, barring false or misleading communications including material misrepresentations, statements likely to create unjustified expectations, and unsubstantiated comparisons.

The Panel concluded that the advertisement did not violate Rule 7.1. Although the ad implied a concentration by the firm, it also contained the language indicating that Rhode Island has no procedure for certification or recognition of specialization by lawyers, and therefore conformed with Rule 7.4.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1993 (Opinion 93-103, issued December 8, 1993), after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988, and it applies Rules 7.1 and 7.4 as originally adopted. The Rhode Island Supreme Court later revised the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2007 as part of the nationwide Ethics 2000 process, and the lawyer-advertising rules have been amended over time. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a firm advertise informational seminars that promote one legal instrument over another?

A: On these facts, yes. The Panel concluded the seminar ad did not violate Rule 7.1 because it carried the Rule 7.4 specialization disclaimer, even though it implied a concentration.

Q: Why did implying a concentration not sink the ad?

A: Because the ad included the required statement that Rhode Island has no procedure for certifying or recognizing specialization, so it conformed with Rule 7.4.

Q: What does Rule 7.1 require of a seminar ad?

A: That statements about the lawyer's services be truthful; the rule governs all forms of communication and bars false or misleading statements.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services) and 7.4 (fields of practice and specialization), the state analogs of the corresponding Model Rules. Rule 7.1 barred false or misleading communications and applied to all forms of communication. Rule 7.4 required the Rhode Island specialization disclaimer where an ad implies a concentration; the presence of that disclaimer is what brought this ad into conformity.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.1 / RI RPC 7.1 (truthful, non-misleading communications about a lawyer's services)
• MR 7.4 / RI RPC 7.4 (specialization; Rhode Island certification disclaimer)

See also

• RI EAP Opinion 92-55: law-related seminars and brochures are not solicitation under Rule 7.3
• RI EAP Opinion 90-25: a newspaper ad compliant but needing the Rule 7.4 specialization 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%2093-103.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

(0646)
FINAL

ETHICS ADVISORY PANEL
OPINION #93-103 REQUEST #455
Issued December 8, 1993

The inquiring attorney's law firm conducts free informational seminars for the general public on a certain field of law. The seminars are advertised in a newspaper of state-wide circulation. The advertisement contains several statements regarding the merits and advantages of using one particular type of legal instrument over another type. Information concerning the dates and locations of the seminars is stated in the advertisement, as well as the names of the lawyers responsible for its content. The advertisement contains language indicating that Rhode Island does not have a procedure for certification or recognition of specialization by lawyers. The inquiring attorney asks whether the advertisement conforms with Rule 7.1 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Rule 7.1 states:

Rule 7.1 Communications Concerning a Lawyer's Services. - A lawyer shall not make a false or misleading communication about the lawyer or the lawyer's services. A communication is false or misleading if it:

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

(b) 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 Rules of Professional Conduct or other law; or

(c) compares the lawyer's services with other lawyers' services, unless the comparison can be factually substantiated.

The Rule requires that statements about a lawyer's services should be truthful and it governs all forms of communications.

The Panel concludes the advertisement as used by the inquiring attorney's law firm does not violate Rule 7.1. Though the advertisement does imply a concentration by the inquiring attorney's law firm, it also contains language indicating that Rhode Island does not have a procedure for certification or recognition of specialization by lawyers and therefore conforms with Rule 7.4.