Can a Washington lawyer hand out written advertisements at someone else's living trust seminar to solicit attendance at the lawyer's own workshop?

Plain-English summary

A lawyer asked about handing out letters at living trust seminars given by other parties, soliciting attendance at a workshop held at the lawyer's own law office. The question was whether handing out the written advertisement at the seminar was permissible and whether the content was proper.

The committee was of the opinion that nothing in the Rules of Professional Conduct would prevent the lawyer from handing out the written advertisement at a seminar. It went on to conclude, however, that the content of the proposed materials would be misleading or deceptive in many respects, such as suggesting that the recipient would be sued, and that the materials in most respects omitted facts necessary to make the statements, considered as a whole, not materially misleading. The committee added that it could render no opinion on whether the lawyer's activities gave the attorney presenting the seminar a valid cause of action for unfair trade practices, because that question was beyond the authority granted to the committee.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1991, before the 2006 revisions to the Washington 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Could the lawyer hand out written advertisements at another party's seminar?

A: The committee was of the opinion that nothing in the Rules of Professional Conduct would prevent handing out the written advertisement at a seminar.

Q: What was the problem with the materials the lawyer proposed to distribute?

A: The committee concluded the content would be misleading or deceptive in many respects, such as suggesting the recipient would be sued, and that it omitted facts necessary to keep the statements, as a whole, from being materially misleading.

Q: Did the committee decide whether the seminar presenter could sue the lawyer for unfair trade practices?

A: No. The committee said it could render no opinion on that question because it was beyond the authority granted to the committee.

Background and rules framework

The opinion addressed the distribution of written advertising and the content of a living trust solicitation under RPC 7.3, Washington's rule on direct contact and solicitation, which corresponds to ABA Model Rule 7.3. The committee separated the manner of distribution, which it found permissible, from the content, which it found misleading or deceptive.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• ABA Model Rule 7.3 (solicitation and direct contact with prospective clients)
• Washington RPC 7.3

See also

• AL Ethics Op. 1996-05: Direct-Mail Advertising Rules
• SC Bar Ethics Op. 90-01: Announcing a Certified Specialty

Source

• Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=501

Original opinion text

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

Advisory Opinion: 1421
Year Issued: 1991
RPC(s): RPC 7.3
Subject: Advertising; distributing written advertisement in person; misleading or deceptive living trust solicitation

The Committee reviewed your inquiry regarding handing out letters at living trust seminars given by other parties, in which you solicit attendance at a workshop at your law office. The Committee was of the opinion that nothing in the Rules of Professional Conduct would prevent you from handing out the written advertisement at a seminar. However, the Committee was of the opinion that the content of the materials you propose to hand out would be misleading or deceptive in many respects, such as suggesting that the recipient will be sued, and in most respects omits facts necessary to make to statements considered as a whole not materially misleading. The Committee can render no opinion regarding whether your activities give the attorney presenting the seminar a valid cause of action for unfair trade practices because to do so is beyond the authority granted to the Committee.