Can a lawyer submit a competitive bid when a city asks local bar members to bid for the job of recodifying its ordinances?

Plain-English summary

A city wishing to recodify its ordinances made a general request that all attorneys in the local bar association interested in the employment submit bids to the city council. The inquiry asked whether it would be unethical for an attorney to submit a bid in response.

All members except one concluded it would be unethical to submit a bid for legal employment in response to such a general advertisement for bids, and that doing so would not be in keeping with the dignity of the profession (7-1). The Committee expressed the view that submitting a bid for employment under those circumstances would be equivalent to solicitation in violation of Texas Canon 24.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1957, under the former Texas Canons of Ethics, which the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct replaced effective January 1, 1990. It also predates Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977), which loosened categorical advertising restrictions, though prohibitions on solicitation were not eliminated. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Could a lawyer bid when the city invited bids from the local bar?

A: No. A majority held that responding to the city's general request for bids was improper solicitation under Canon 24 and inconsistent with the dignity of the profession (7-1).

Q: Why was responding to a public request for bids treated as solicitation?

A: The Committee viewed submitting a competitive bid for legal employment in response to a general advertisement for bids as the equivalent of soliciting the work, which Canon 24 forbade.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets former Texas Canon 24 (advertising and solicitation). The modern analog is ABA Model Rule 7.3 (solicitation of clients), under which the categorical bans of the canon era were substantially narrowed after Bates and later commercial-speech decisions.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.3 (solicitation of clients), as the modern analog
• Texas Canon 24 (advertising and solicitation)

See also

• TX Ethics Op. 181: Soliciting Docket-Call Work
• TX Ethics Op. 161: Soliciting Work From Lawyers

Source

• Landing page: https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-146/
• Original PDF: https://tcle-web.s3.amazonaws.com/public/documents/Opinion_146.pdf

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION PRESENTED

Where a city desiring to recodify its ordinances makes a general request that all attorneys in the local bar association interested in such employment submit bids therefor to the city council, would it be unethical for an attorney in response to such request to submit a bid for such employment?

18 Baylor L. Rev. 256 (1966)

SOLICITATION - SUBMITTING BIDS
Submitting a bid in response to a city's general request looking to recodification of its ordinances would not be in keeping with the dignity of the profession.

Canon 24.

All members of the committee except one are of the opinion that it would be unethical to submit a bid for legal employment in response to such a general advertisement for bids and would not be in keeping with the dignity of the profession. The view was expressed that submitting a bid for employment under such circumstances would be equivalent to solicitation in violation of Texas Canon of Ethics 24. (7-1)

Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 146 (1957)