Classified Ethics
At right is a photocopy of a classified advertisement that recently appeared in a local paper. (Click the image for a larger version.) What’s wrong with this picture?
Rule 7.2 of the Montana Rules of Professional Conduct says “a lawyer shall not give anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer’s services except for paying “reasonable costs” of advertising or the fees of a “qualified lawyer referral service” that has been approved by an “appropriate regulatory authority.”
Of course, if this is not advertising the services of a lawyer, Rule 7.2 wouldn’t apply. But then, might there be issues with “unauthorized practice of law”? I don’t really know, but something does seem a little less than above board here…. [tags]upl, advertising, ethics[/tags]
2 comments »
Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post or for TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
As I read rule 7.2, the advertisement does not violate it. The rule forbids offering compensation for recommending a lawyer. The advertisement offers compensation for referrals, not recommendations. If Doe recommends lawyer Holmes to Roe and Holmes compensates him for doing this, that violates rule 7.2. If, however, Doe tells Holmes that Roe needs a lawyer and that he should give him a call, and Holmes compensates Doe for this information, there is no violation of the rule since no recommendation took place.
Comment by Bill Poser — January 21, 2008 @ 2:14 am
[...] obscure comment on Fight ‘Em ‘Til We Can’t about whether the Montana Rules of Ethics actually allow a lawyer to get paid for [...]
Pingback by the imbroglio » Blog Archive » 62 Tabs!? — February 23, 2008 @ 1:24 pm