Can a law firm mail written invitations to a law-office open house to local business owners it has no prior relationship with?

Plain-English summary

Opinion E-94-3 (1994) asked whether lawyers opening a new office in an office-sharing arrangement may hold an open house and send written invitations to business owners in the surrounding community. The committee first withdrew its earlier Formal Opinion E-81-1, which had interpreted the former Code of Professional Responsibility to bar inviting people who had no prior professional relationship or personal friendship with the firm's lawyers. The committee explained that the law had changed substantially since E-81-1: the Rules of Professional Conduct had replaced the Code, and constitutional protections for commercial speech had developed.

The committee assumed that an open house at law offices is motivated, at least in part, by a desire to attract clients, and framed the question as whether a written invitation amounts to initiating personal contact with a prospective client for the purpose of obtaining employment, which then-SCR 20:7.3(c) could prohibit. Reading the rule in light of constitutional limits, the committee relied on Shapero v. Kentucky Bar Association, 486 U.S. 466 (1988), in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that targeted written solicitation letters were constitutionally protected, in part because a writing can be ignored, discarded, or answered at the recipient's discretion and so does not present the overreaching risks of in-person or telephone contact.

Applying that reasoning, the committee concluded that a written open-house invitation is the same in kind: the recipient may ignore, discard, or respond to it, and any in-person contact that results occurs at the recipient's election when the recipient voluntarily chooses to attend. The committee therefore answered yes, lawyers may sponsor an open house to which members of the public are invited, while noting that this does not lessen the lawyer's responsibility under then-SCR 20:7.1 to make only accurate and non-misleading statements about the lawyer's services.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1994, before Wisconsin's July 1, 2007 adoption of the revised Rules of Professional Conduct (the state's Ethics 2000 update). The opinion interprets the lawyer-advertising and solicitation rules (then-SCR 20:7.3 and 20:7.1), an area that has been substantially revised since, and it relies on the commercial-speech framework as it stood in 1994. 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 law firm mail open-house invitations to people it had no prior relationship with?

A: Yes. The committee concluded a written invitation can be ignored or discarded, so it does not carry the overreaching risk of in-person solicitation, and any contact that follows is at the recipient's election.

Q: What case did the committee rely on?

A: Shapero v. Kentucky Bar Association, 486 U.S. 466 (1988), in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that targeted written solicitation letters were constitutionally protected commercial speech.

Q: Did this opinion overrule an earlier Wisconsin opinion?

A: Yes. The committee withdrew Formal Opinion E-81-1, which had read the former Code of Professional Responsibility to prohibit inviting people without a prior professional or personal relationship.

Background and rules framework

At the time of the opinion, then-SCR 20:7.3 / Model Rule 7.3 governed solicitation of prospective clients and then-SCR 20:7.1 / Model Rule 7.1 required communications about a lawyer's services to be truthful and not misleading. The committee read these rules against the First Amendment commercial-speech doctrine reflected in Shapero, concluding that written invitations the recipient is free to disregard do not constitute prohibited solicitation.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Wis. SCR 20:7.3(c) / Model Rule 7.3 (solicitation of clients) (as in effect in 1994)
• Wis. SCR 20:7.1 / Model Rule 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services)

Cases:

• Shapero v. Kentucky Bar Association, 486 U.S. 466 (1988) (targeted written solicitation is constitutionally protected commercial speech)

Other opinions cited:

• Wis. Formal Op. E-81-1 (withdrawn by this opinion)

See also

• ABA Formal Op. 501: Solicitation
• AL Bar Ethics Op. 1996-05: Direct Mail Advertising
• WI Ethics Op. E-94-4: Seminars and Client Development

Source

• Landing page: https://www.wisbar.org/formembers/ethics/pages/formal-opinions.aspx
• Original PDF: https://www.wisbar.org/formembers/ethics/Ethics%20Opinions/E-94-3.pdf