Can a lawyer advertise by posting fliers around a venue?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry concerned posting fliers around a particular entertainment venue. The committee concluded that RPC 7.2 specifically authorizes advertising "through written communication," and that because a flier is a written communication, the proposed course of conduct is authorized, subject to compliance with the balance of RPC 7.2 and with RPC 7.1 and 7.3.

The committee cautioned that it had not addressed whether the owners or operators of the entertainment venue must give their permission before such activity is conducted, because that question is beyond the purview of the committee.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1998, before the Washington State Bar Association's adoption of the 2006 revisions to 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 mentioned here. Washington's RPC 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3 corresponded to ABA Model Rules 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services), 7.2 (advertising), and 7.3 (solicitation); the ABA later amended and consolidated its advertising rules, so verify the current Washington numbering and text before relying on it.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer post advertising fliers?

A: Yes. The committee concluded that because RPC 7.2 authorizes advertising through written communication and a flier is a written communication, posting fliers is authorized, subject to RPC 7.2, 7.1, and 7.3.

Q: Did the committee say the lawyer can post anywhere?

A: No. The committee expressly did not address whether the venue's owners or operators must consent, treating that as beyond its purview.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied Washington RPC 7.2 (advertising through written and other communications), with compliance also required under RPC 7.1 (false or misleading communications) and RPC 7.3 (solicitation), corresponding to ABA Model Rules 7.2, 7.1, and 7.3. The committee made the permissibility of fliers turn on their status as written communications authorized by RPC 7.2, and left the property-permission question to other law.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• ABA Model Rule 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services); Washington RPC 7.1
• ABA Model Rule 7.2 (advertising); Washington RPC 7.2
• ABA Model Rule 7.3 (solicitation of clients); Washington RPC 7.3

See also

• WA Ethics Op. 1824: 'CFE' Credential in Lawyer Ads
• WA Ethics Op. 1182: Contingent-Fee Ads and Costs
• WA Ethics Op. 1820: 'Of Counsel' in the Firm Name

Source

• Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=1018

Original opinion text

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

Advisory Opinion: 1825
Year Issued: 1998
RPC(s): RPC 7.1; 7.2; 7.3
Subject: Advertising; posting of fliers

The Committee researched and reviewed your inquiry concerning the posting of fliers around a particular entertainment venue and determined the following:

RPC 7.2 specifically authorizes advertising "through written communication" and since a flier is a written communication, the proposed course of conduct is authorized, subject to compliance with the balance of RPC 7.2 and RPCs 7.1 and 7.3. We should caution the inquirer that we have not addressed the issue of whether the owners/operators of the entertainment venue must give their permission before such activity is conducted, as such a question is beyond the purview of the Committee.