Is a lawyer responsible when newspapers report his courtroom successes, and when does that publicity become improper?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry described newspaper articles reporting a lawyer's results, including a personal-injury settlement of $87,500 in an agreed judgment (with a running total of compensation his firm's clients had received that week) and a workers' compensation suit being taken to the Texas Supreme Court. The questions asked whether such articles violate the Canons, whether it matters if the attorney wrote or approved them, and whether it is improper for the named attorney to allow repetition of such articles over time without encouraging or discouraging use of his name.

The Committee concluded that if the articles were written entirely by newspaper reporters from their observation of the trials, from court records, and from sources other than the attorney, with no control by the attorney over the writing, there is no violation (9-0). But if the attorney wrote the articles, approved them, or instigated their publication, he would violate Canons 17 and 24; and if he allows repetition of such articles over a period of time without encouraging or discouraging use of his name, he would likewise violate Canons 17 and 24. The Committee added that whether the articles were written, approved, furnished, or instigated by the attorney is a fact question for a Grievance Committee to determine.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1958, 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. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Is a lawyer responsible for newspaper coverage of his cases?

A: The Committee concluded that purely reporter-sourced coverage, with no input or control by the lawyer, is not a violation; responsibility turns on whether the lawyer wrote, approved, furnished, or instigated the coverage.

Q: What if the lawyer wrote or approved the article?

A: The Committee concluded that writing, approving, or instigating the publication of such articles violates Canons 17 and 24.

Q: Does ignoring repeated favorable articles create a problem?

A: The Committee concluded that allowing repetition of such articles over time without encouraging or discouraging use of his name violates Canons 17 and 24.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets former Texas Canons 17 (newspaper discussion of pending litigation) and 24 (advertising and solicitation), as applied to press coverage of a lawyer's results. The modern analogs are ABA Model Rule 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services) and Model Rule 3.6 (trial publicity).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services), as the modern analog
• MR 3.6 (trial publicity), as the modern analog
• Texas Canons 17 and 24 (former canons on publicity about pending litigation and on advertising)

See also

• TX Ethics Op. 169: A Lawyer's Card in the Local Newspaper
• TX Ethics Op. 165: A Lawyer's Listing in a High-School Football Program
• TX Ethics Op. 196: Solicitation and "Feeding" of Law Business

Source

• Landing page: https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-164/
• Original PDF: https://tcle-web.s3.amazonaws.com/public/documents/Opinion_164.pdf

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION PRESENTED

An article which was published in a newspaper in a city in this State with reference to a settlement made during the trial of a personal injury damage suit in which it was stated that the plaintiff received $87,500 in an agreed judgment after the trial had commenced, in which the name of the plaintiff's attorney was given and in which it was stated that such attorney said that the agreed judgment was entered shortly after testimony had commenced in the trial after a day and a half was consumed in the selection of a jury. In the article it was stated that "The amount brought to $165,519.54 the compensation received by two clients of the [ ]law firm in cases heard in [ ]this week . . . " It also stated the nature of the accident involved in the suit and said that the attorney for the plaintiff stated that tests had been run by a certain institution on the alleged defective mechanism involved in the accident.

Another article appeared in the same newspaper in which it was stated that two lawyers of the city (one of those lawyers being the same one mentioned in the newspaper article referred to above) were leaving for Austin to present a workman's compensation suit before the Supreme Court of Texas. It stated that such lawyers represented the plaintiff in the suit. The article also stated the nature of the claim and that the plaintiff was awarded judgment in the trial court and such judgment was upheld by the Court of Civil Appeals.

The newspaper articles are not quoted because they are too lengthy.
Do such newspaper articles as written violate the Canons of Ethics?
Is there a violation of the Canons of Ethics if an attorney wrote them and/or approved the story himself?
Is there a violation of the Canons of Ethics where the attorney named in newspaper articles of this nature allows repetition of such articles over a period of time without encouraging the use of his name or discouraging the same?

18 Baylor L. Rev. 266 (1966)

NEWSPAPER DISCUSSION OF PENDING LEGISLATION - SOLICITATION
Where newspaper articles relating the success of an attorney in securing settlements in personal injury litigation are based solely on the newspaper reporters' observations or from sources other than the attorney mentioned therein, there is not impropriety. However, it would be improper for the attorney to write and/or approve them or instigate their publication.

Canons 17, 24.

If the articles were written entirely by newspaper reporters from their observation of the trials, from the facts ascertained by them from the court records and from sources other than the attorney mentioned therein and such attorney had no control over the writing of the article there would not be any violation of the Canons of Ethics of the State Bar.
If the attorney mentioned therein wrote the articles and/or approved them or instigated their publication then he would be violating Canons 17 and 24 of the State Bar.
If the attorney named in such newspaper articles allows repetition of such articles over a period of time without encouraging or discouraging the use of his name in connection therewith, then he would be violating Canons 17 and 24 of the State Bar.
Whether the newspaper articles in question were written by, approved, furnished or instigated by the attorney mentioned therein is a fact question which should be ascertained by a Grievance Committee. (9-0)

Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 164 (1958)