Could a Vermont lawyer mail office-opening announcements naming practice areas to prospective clients?

Short answer Opinion 88-05 permitted a general mailing to people with a general connection to the named practice areas and allowed the lawyer to identify intended concentrations. It distinguished mailings aimed at people known to need help in a particular matter.
Bar
VTBAR
Issued
1988

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1988. Ask about yours and see what the current Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.

Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original ethics opinion (PDF)

Plain-English summary

A lawyer opening a Vermont office proposed mailing an announcement of a general practice, including named subject areas, to lawyers and others whose work related to those areas. The committee held that former DR 2-105 allowed the lawyer to list fields of concentration without claiming specialist status.

The committee also found the general mailing permissible under former DR 2-104(3), which allowed broadly distributed letters to people who might generally find the services useful. It distinguished a mailing aimed at people known to need legal services in a specific matter and noted the rule's limits on misleading, unwanted, coercive, or harassing communications.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1988, before Vermont's 1999 adoption of the Rules of Professional Conduct. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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.

Common questions

Q: Could the announcement name several intended practice areas?

A: Yes. The committee treated the list as permitted concentration information under DR 2-105, rather than a specialist claim.

Q: Could it be mailed to people connected generally with those areas?

A: Yes. The committee concluded the proposed general mailing fell within DR 2-104(3).

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied former Vermont DR 2-105 on practice fields and DR 2-104(3) on general mailings. It cited Model Rule 7.3 in a footnote discussing Shapero.

Citations and references

Former Vermont disciplinary rules:

  • DR 2-101, DR 2-104(3), and DR 2-105.

Model Rules cited:

  • Model Rule 7.3.

Cases cited:

  • Shapero v. Kentucky Bar Association, 56 U.S.L.W. 4531 (U.S. June 13, 1988).

Other opinions cited:

  • Vermont Opinions 79-11 and 79-17.

See also

Source

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 1988. Ezel checks the current Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct against your situation and cites the rules it relies on.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace