New York State Bar Opinion 1032

Committee on Professional Ethics Topic: Responding to a former client’s critical commentary on a website   Digest of the Committee: “A lawyer may not disclose confidential client information solely to respond to a former client’s criticism of the lawyer posted on a lawyer-rating website.” New York Rules of Professional Conduct: 1.6(a); 1.6(b); 1.9(c) The full […]

Tags: , , ,

New York State Bar Opinion 1014

Committee on Professional Ethics Topic: Solicitation, client recommendation Digest of the Committee: “Lawyer may contact prospective client recommended by current client when prospective client has made known that lawyer should contact the prospective client and the lawyer did not make any payment or give any other consideration to the current client for the recommendation.” Rules: […]

Tags: , , ,

New York State Bar Opinion 1009

Committee on Professional Ethics Topic:  Advertising; solicitation; press releases and tweets regarding shareholder litigation Digest of the Committee: “Press releases and tweets directed to potential clients in shareholder suits constitute advertising and solicitation. They are thus subject to retention requirements, and, if directed to New York recipients, are also subject to filing requirements. The tweets […]

Tags: , , ,

New York State Bar Opinion 1005

Committee on Professional Ethics Topic: “Whether using the phrases “I KNOW HOW TO WIN FOR YOU” or “unsurpassed litigation skills,” violates Rule 7.1.” Digest of the Committee: “Neither the statement “I KNOW HOW TO WIN FOR YOU” or “unsurpassed litigation skills” in lawyer advertising is permissible under Rule 7.1 because the statements are misleading, and neither statement can […]

Tags: , ,

South Carolina State Bar Ethics Advisory Opinion 13-05

Ethics Advisory Committee Topic: May attorneys enter into a co-operative style TV based advertising contract with a for profit, non-lawyer, out-of-state third party advertising company paying a pro-rata share cost? Summary of the Committee  “Advertisements must include the name and office address of a responsible South Carolina attorney and, in order to avoid misleading the […]

Tags: ,

State Bar of Michigan Ethics Opinion RI-365

Professional Ethics Committee Topic: Referral Fee; Advertising Syllabus of the Committee: A lawyer’s agreement to pay a referral fee to a nonlawyer-owned, for profit website entity for each potential consumer that accesses the website and expresses an interest in the lawyer’s substantive law subject matter is unethical, since it requires the lawyer to give something […]

Tags:

ABA Formal Opinion 465

American Bar Association Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility Topic: Lawyers’ Use of Deal-of-the-Day Marketing Programs The Committee analyzed two types of programs: coupon and prepaid. In a coupon program, the purchaser buys a voucher entitling the purchaser to a discount on legal fees. In the prepaid plan, the purchaser pays a lump sum […]

Tags: , , , ,

1 2 3 4 5 10