ER 7.1 Communications Concerning a Lawyer's Services & ER 7.3 Solicitation of New Clients
The Standard
Statements concerning a lawyer’s services cannot be false or misleading. Generally speaking, lawyers cannot engage in live person-to-person solicitation, although there are some exceptions to this rule. Of course, if a person asks a lawyer not to contact him or her, the lawyer must stop. Broad-based truthful marketing strategies are acceptable. A lawyer or law firm, including the lawyer’s name and contact information, must be included in any communication concerning the lawyer’s service.
The Limitation
Statements can be misleading if they omit a fact that is necessary to make the statement as a whole not misleading. Avoid making guarantees, or creating false expectations. Although direct person-to-person solicitation is generally prohibited, lawyers can directly solicit other lawyers, those with whom they have close, personal relationships, professional relationships, or those who routinely use the type of legal services the lawyer offers in their business.
FAQs
ER 7.1 requires that every communication about a lawyer's services at least include the lawyer or law firm name that is responsible for the content and some contact information, which can be the address, website, telephone number, or email address.
Yes. ER 7.1, as amended in 2021, now permits lawyers to say that they "specialize" in a practice area if they actually have expertise or limit their practice to a certain area of law. Only lawyers who are certified by the State Bar of Arizona Board of Legal Specialization may say that they are "certified specialists."
No. But lawyers may ask for a voluntary review by the State Bar's Practice 2.0 Department.
Required? No, but it is recommended that lawyers include some disclaimer to manage prospective client expectations, explaining that results may vary and there is no guarantee of a similar result in anyone else's case. Also, to list results from prior cases that may identify a former client's case or identity, the lawyer must obtain the former client's consent to use the information. Yes, this means getting former client consent even if the prior case is a public record and reported decision.
Not unless the person is the lawyer's family member or close personal friend – and even then it is not advisable. ER 7.3 has very specific restrictions on telephone, in-person, and real-time electronic soliciting of anyone with a known need or reasonably likely need for legal services for a specific matter. Lawyers cannot cold-call respondents in divorces or any other specific matters unless the person being called falls within one of the narrow exceptions in ER 7.3.
Yes. ER 7.3 prohibits live person-to-person contact, but not mailers or emails, unless the person you sent them to has told you to stop.
Yes. The ERs were changed in 2021, and Arizona lawyers may now pay referral fees to anyone for referring clients to them – but be careful. A lawyer cannot thank a referral source (with or without money) without obtaining the client's informed consent to disclose the fact that the client contacted the lawyer -- even if the referral source already knows they gave the client the lawyer's name. The fact that someone consults with a lawyer is "confidential" under ERs 1.6 and 1.18 even if the prospective client never retains the firm.
No. That would be considered prohibited in-person solicitation in violation of ER 7.3. Lawyers are responsible for ensuring that their staff (and independent contractors) conform their conduct to the lawyer's ethical obligations. Train employees and marketing companies on the ERs pertaining to advertising and solicitation. See ABA Op. 501; ER 8.4(a)
No. That is false claim. ER 7.1 prohibits false and misleading advertising. You must employ more than one actual associate attorney to use the phrase "and Associates" in a law firm name. Other prohibited naming conventions include implying a connection to a charity or government entity, including the names of lawyers who have not worked at your firm, and including the names of disbarred or disability inactive lawyers.
Yes. Factually accurate trade names are permitted for Arizona law firms.
No – but it is a good idea.
No – both because that is false (of course a lawyer cannot guarantee a result) and because it would create unreasonable expectations in clients.
Caution! Even if the advertising says "Attorney is admitted to practice law only in Arizona," other states may find that to be in violation of their rules, as well as the unauthorized practice of law in their jurisdictions. A national ad campaign should include such a disclaimer and also identify that the lawyer may associate with local counsel or be admitted through pro hac vice admissions.
Yes, the use of AI is permitted, but you should make clear that the chatbot is not a real person. You should also put the AI you plan to use through sufficient testing before it goes live. It’s not unethical to have a malfunctioning or sub-functioning chatbot, but it’s a big turn- off to potential clients.
There are no mandatory disclaimers for law firm websites that include the required firm name and contact information, but the following are recommended:
* This website is regulated by the Arizona Rules of Professional Conduct.
* Reading this website does not create an attorney/client relationship with the firm. This is merely legal information, not legal advice.
*Sending us unsolicited information does not create an attorney/client relationship.
Best Practices
- ER 1.1 Competence
- ER 1.2 Scope of Representation
- ER 1.3 Diligence
- ER 1.4 Communication
- ER 1.5 Fees
- ER 1.6 Confidentiality of Information
- ERs 1.7 & 1.10 Conflicts of Interest and Screening Tips
- ER 1.8 Conflict of Interest: Current Clients: Specific Rules
- ER 1.9 Duties to Former Clients
- ER 1.11 Special Conflicts of Interest for Former and Current Government Officers and Employees
- ER 1.13 Organization as Client
- ER 1.14 Client with Diminished Capacity
- ER 1.15 Safekeeping Property
- ER 1.16 Declining or Terminating Representation
- ER 2.4 Lawyer Serving as Third-Party Neutral
- ER 3.1 Meritorious Claims and Contentions
- ER 5.1 Responsibilities of Lawyers Who Have Ownership Interests or are Managers or Supervisors; ER 5.2 Responsibilities of a Subordinate Lawyer; and ER 5.3 Responsibilities Regarding Nonlawyers
- ER 7.1 Communications Concerning a Lawyer's Services & ER 7.3 Solicitation of New Clients
- ER 8.3 Reporting Professional Misconduct