Can a law firm send mimeographed Christmas-party invitations on firm letterhead to its clients and their claims employees?

Plain-English summary

A claims agent of an insurance company received a mimeographed invitation, on a law firm's stationery, to the firm's "annual Christmas party for our clients." The envelope was addressed only to the claim manager, with a request that he pass the invitation around to "all the boys" in the claim department. The firm had sent similar invitations for about seven years, and some recipients worked for companies the firm had represented seven years earlier but no longer represented. The inquiry asked whether the practice violated the Canons.

The Committee said it could not tell lawyers generally that they may not hold office parties at Christmas, noting that Opinion 102 permits an "open house" for clients and friends. It found this invitation different. It read as more commercial, being styled "our annual Christmas party for our clients," and it was sent to employees of clients, and possibly to employees of a company that was not a client, where no personal relationship between those employees and the firm justified the invitation.

The Committee concluded that, when the tone of an invitation is somewhat commercial, a firm's use of it would smack of advertising and solicitation and would violate Canon 24. It cited Opinions 210 and 168 and ABA Opinion 59 as addressing comparable problems. The ruling was 9-0.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1963, 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Can a law firm host a Christmas open house for clients?

A: Under this opinion, yes in principle. The Committee said it could not tell lawyers they may not hold office parties at Christmas and noted that Opinion 102 permits an open house for clients and friends.

Q: What made this particular invitation improper?

A: The Committee found the invitation commercial in tone, styled "our annual Christmas party for our clients," and sent to clients' employees (and possibly to employees of a non-client company) who had no personal relationship with the firm to justify it.

Q: Does a commercial tone alone create a Canon 24 problem?

A: The Committee said that if the tone of an invitation is somewhat commercial, the firm's use of it would smack of advertising and solicitation and would violate Canon 24.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets former Texas Canon 24, which prohibited advertising and solicitation by lawyers, as applied to party invitations sent on firm letterhead. The modern analogs are ABA Model Rule 7.1, on communications concerning a lawyer's services, and Model Rule 7.3, on solicitation of clients.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services), as the modern analog
• MR 7.3 (solicitation of clients), as the modern analog
• Texas Canon 24 (former canon)

Other opinions cited:

• Texas Opinion 102: permits an open house for clients and friends
• Texas Opinions 210 and 168: comparable advertising and solicitation problems
• ABA Opinion 59: comparable problem

See also

• TX Ethics Op. 261: Advertising a Law Office Open House
• TX Ethics Op. 277: Business-Guide and Directory Listings
• TX Ethics Op. 280: Attorney-Holds-Duplicate Will Clause

Source

• Landing page: https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-258/
• Original PDF: https://tcle-web.s3.amazonaws.com/public/documents/Opinion_258.pdf

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION PRESENTED

The following invitation, sent out in mimeographed form on the stationery of a law firm, was received by a Claims Agent of an insurance Company:

AN INVITATION
TO
OUR ANNUAL CHRISTMAS
PARTY FOR OUR CLIENTS
DATE: ___
TIME: _
PLACE: _

Since the personnel in the Claim Departments of our clients often change during the year, to make certain no one is overlooked, the envelope containing this invitation is being addressed only to the Claim Manager, with the request that you pass it around to all the boys. It is intended for all of you.

We look forward to seeing you.
Cordially,

This law firm has sent out a similar letter for about the last seven years. Inasmuch as seven years ago the law firm may have represented a company to whom the firm still sends invitations but whom the firm does not now represent, would the firm's action be in violation of the Canons of Ethics?

18 Baylor L. Rev. 335 (1966)

ADVERTISING AND SOLICITATION
While it is not improper for a law firm to give an "open house" for its clients and friends at Christmas, if the invitation to such a party is commercial in tone the action of the law firm in sending such an invitation would constitute advertising and solicitation.

Canon 24.

The question seems to be whether a law firm may give a Christmas party for clients and invite them by mimeographed invitations on firm letterheads, particularly when the law firm seems to have difficulty distinguishing between clients and former clients␣a distinction not always easy to make.

The committee feels that it cannot tell lawyers generally that they cannot have any office parties at Christmas. Opinion 102 permits "open house" for clients and friends. The invitation in question, however, seems more commercial in nature, being termed "our annual Christmas party for our clients." In addition, the invitation is sent, as one of our committee expressed it, to employees of clients (and possibly to employees of a company that is not a client) where there is no personal relationship between these employees and the law firm to justify such an invitation.

The committee believes, therefore, that, if the tone of an invitation is somewhat commercial, the action of a law firm in using such invitation would smack of advertising and solicitation and would violate Canon 24. See Opinions 210 and 168 and ABA Opinion 59, relating to different but comparable problems. (9-0.)

Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 258 (1963)