Can a lawyer partner with a non-lawyer to provide labor-management or business consulting when some of the work is legal work?

Plain-English summary

Informal Opinion 3/67 addressed the propriety of an active member of the Bar creating a partnership in which the lawyer would engage in labor-management relations work and his non-lawyer partner would handle market research analysis and similar business advice. A related question asked whether the attorney could advertise this labor-management relations advice, alone or together with his partner's advertising.

Examining the proposed activities, the committee determined that in part they would constitute the practice of law. Because Canon 33 prohibits a partnership between lawyers and non-attorneys where part of the partnership's activity will involve the practice of law, the committee concluded the proposed partnership would be unethical for the attorney. The opinion also noted that Canon 27 prohibits the solicitation of legal work by attorneys, by direct or indirect means, subject to certain stated exceptions, and that under Canon 2 of the Code of Professional Responsibility the opinion would be the same.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1967, before Wisconsin's July 1, 2007 adoption of the revised Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys (the state's Ethics 2000 update), and it applied the former Canons of Professional Ethics (Canon 33 on partnerships with non-lawyers and Canon 27 on solicitation). The current counterparts are SCR 20:5.4 / Model Rule 5.4 (professional independence; a lawyer may not form a partnership with a non-lawyer if any of the partnership's activities consist of the practice of law) and SCR 20:7.3 / Model Rule 7.3 (solicitation of clients). Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions, and decisions on lawyer advertising, 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 partner with a non-lawyer to provide labor-management consulting?

A: Not as proposed. The committee found part of the work would constitute law practice, and Canon 33 prohibits a lawyer/non-lawyer partnership where part of the activity is the practice of law, so the partnership would be unethical.

Q: Why did it matter that some of the work was legal work?

A: Canon 33's prohibition turned on whether any part of the partnership's activity involved the practice of law; the committee concluded part of the proposed work did, which triggered the bar.

Q: Could the lawyer advertise the labor-management advice?

A: The opinion noted that Canon 27 prohibits solicitation of legal work by direct or indirect means, with certain stated exceptions, limiting how the lawyer could promote the legal work.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied the former Canons of Professional Ethics: Canon 33 (forbidding partnerships between lawyers and non-attorneys where part of the activity is the practice of law) and Canon 27 (solicitation), and noted Canon 2 of the Code reached the same result. The current counterparts are SCR 20:5.4 / Model Rule 5.4 (professional independence of a lawyer; restrictions on partnerships with non-lawyers) and SCR 20:7.3 / Model Rule 7.3 (solicitation of clients).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Model Rule 5.4 / SCR 20:5.4 (professional independence; partnership with a non-lawyer involving the practice of law); former Canon 33
• Model Rule 7.3 / SCR 20:7.3 (solicitation of clients); former Canon 27

See also

• WI Ethics Op. I-1-62: Law Corporations and Names
• WI Ethics Op. E-84-4: Division of Legal Fees With a Layperson

Source

• Landing page: https://www.wisbar.org/formembers/ethics/pages/formal-opinions.aspx
• Original PDF: https://www.wisbar.org/formembers/ethics/Ethics%20Opinions/I-3-67.pdf