SOLICITATION

Solic. - 1

FORMAL OPINION 1

AUTOMOBILE CLUBS UNLAWFUL PRACTICE

UNLAWFUL TO FURNISH MEMBERS WITH LEGALSERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH OWNERSHIP ANDOPERATION OF AUTOMOBILES.

(Withdrawn 12/31/94).

Solic.-2

FORMAL OPINION 2

CREDIT EXCHANGE UNLAWFUL PRACTICE

UNLAWFUL FOR CREDIT EXCHANGE TO FURNISHCOLLECTION SERVICE TO MEMBERS OR STOCKHOLDERSWHICH INVOLVES SUIT OR THREAT OF SUIT.

(Set out at Un.Pr.-2)

Solic.-3

FORMAL OPINION 9

COLLECTION AGENCIES

SOLICITATION OF BUSINESS FORBIDDEN WHEN OWNEDBY A LAWYER.

(Withdrawn 12/31/94).

Solic.-4

FORMAL OPINION 14


EMPLOYMENT

ACCEPTANCE OF EMPLOYMENT TO PROSECUTECOUNTERCLAIM FOR COMPANY'S INSURED BY ATTORNEYREPRESENTING INSURANCE COMPANY WHENPERMITTED.

QUESTION: A lawyer employed by a casualty company to defendits insured in a suit filed against the insured for personal injuries resultingfrom an automobile collision, finds on investigation that the insured has acounterclaim against the plaintiff for damages growing out of the sameaction. The insured did not realize that he had a counterclaim until he wasso advised by the lawyer (a) Under such circumstances, is it proper for thelawyer to represent the insured in the matter of the counterclaim? (b) Isthe lawyer entitled to make any charge to the insured personally, for hisservices rendered in connection with the counterclaim? (c) Is it of anyimportance that the insured did not realize that he had a counterclaim untilhe was so advised by the lawyer?

ANSWER: (a) If the insured is advised by the lawyer that he hasthe right to select counsel of his choosing to prosecute the counterclaim andthereafter selects the lawyer employed by the casualty company for thatpurpose, it is proper for the lawyer to represent the insured unless thecircumstances are such that the interests of the insurer and the insured willlikely conflict. Any suggestion to the insured by the lawyer of the casualtycompany with the lawyer's consent and knowledge, that the lawyer beemployed to prosecute the counterclaim for the insured constitutessolicitation.

(b) The right of the lawyer employed by the casualty company tomake a charge to the insured personally for services rendered in connectionwith the counterclaim depends upon the circumstances and the agreementbetween the lawyer and the insured. In cases where employment has beensecured in unprofessional manner, there is no liability to pay a fee.

(c) The time of the cause of the insured's realization that he had acounterclaim is immaterial.

[Rule 4 7.3]

Solic.-5

FORMAL OPINION 18

EMPLOYMENT BY ADJUSTING COMPANIES

IMPROPER FOR ATTORNEY TO ACCEPT EMPLOYMENTFROM AN ADJUSTING COMPANY ENGAGED IN THEUNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW TO REPRESENT IT INMATTERS COMING FROM ITS PATRONS.

(Set out at Un.Pr.-12)

Solic.-6

FORMAL OPINION 22

ADVERTISING SOLICITATION FIRE INSURANCE ADJUSTERS

IMPROPER FOR ATTORNEY TO ADVERTISE AS AN "EXPERTFIRE INSURANCE ADJUSTER" OR SOLICIT SUCHBUSINESS.

QUESTION: A lay fire insurance adjuster for the people advertisesin telephone directories, city directories and on his card and stationery thathe is an expert in collecting losses on fire insurance policies. He personallysolicits representation on the basis of the contract described in Question 21.(Editor's note: See Formal Opinion 21 which is set forth in theUnauthorized Practice section of this book, Un.Pr.-13.)

If a duly licensed lawyer should engage in this same work and adoptthe same methods of getting business, would he be subject to discipline ordisbarment?

ANSWER: The Advisory Committee is of the opinion that a lawyerwho engaged in the practices stated in the question would be subject todiscipline. The services to be performed constitute the practice of law.

Canon 2 DR2-103(A)

[Rule 4 7.1; 7.4]

Solic.-7

FORMAL OPINION 24

ADVERTISING

ANNOUNCEMENTS SENT OUT FOR THE PURPOSE OFSOLICITING COMMERCIAL BUSINESS ISUNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT. ANNOUNCEMENTS OFCHANGES IN FIRM WHEN PERMITTED.

(Withdrawn 12/31/94).

Solic.-8

FORMAL OPINION 31

ADVERTISING COLLECTIONS

IMPROPER FOR ATTORNEY TO PUBLICLY ADVERTISETHAT HE HOLDS FOR COLLECTION ALL ACCOUNTS OF ANAMED PARTY.

(Withdrawn 12/31/94).

Solic.-9

FORMAL OPINION 33

RADIO BROADCASTING

RADIO BROADCASTING OF AN OFFER BY A REFUNDCOMPANY TO OBTAIN REFUNDS ON INSURANCE POLICIESIS THE SOLICITATION OF LAW BUSINESS.

(Set out at Un.Pr.-14)

Solic.-10

FORMAL OPINION 39

CORPORATIONS

A BUREAU OF ANALYSIS WHICH SOLICITS THE BUSINESSOF ANALYZING THE FINANCIAL STATUS AND LEGALDOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, IS ENGAGEDIN SOLICITATION OF LAW BUSINESS.

QUESTION: May a Bureau of Analysis solicit the business inMissouri of analyzing the financial status of individuals together with legaldocuments in relation thereto, and is such business the unauthorizedpractice of law?

ANSWER: The Advisory Committee is of the opinion this is thesolicitation of law business and the unauthorized practice of law.

[Rule 4 5.5]

Solic.-11

FORMAL OPINION 40

ATTORNEYS

NOT IMPROPER FOR A MISSOURI LAWYER TO ENGAGE INPRINTING BUSINESS AND SOLICIT FROM THE BAR FORSUCH BUSINESS.

QUESTION: Is it proper for a Missouri lawyer who is engaged inthe printing business, to solicit printing business from the members of theBar?

ANSWER: The Advisory Committee is of the opinion that suchpractice is not improper.

[Rule 4 7.3]

Solic.-12

FORMAL OPINION 95

IMPROPER FOR A LAWYER TO SEND CHRISTMASGREETINGS TO CLIENTS AS SUCH OR TO JOIN OTHERPERSONS IN THE INSERTION OF CHRISTMAS GREETINGSIN A LOCAL NEWSPAPER.

(Withdrawn 12/31/94).

Solic.-13

FORMAL OPINION 106


(Withdrawn 12/31/94).

Solic.-14

(Set out at Adv.-21)

Solic.-15

QUESTION: Can a Missouri attorney participate in a statewideapproved bar-sponsored open panel prepaid legal service plan and ethicallypay a registration fee under Rule 4, DR2-103(C) and DR2103(D) (4)?

ANSWER: Yes, rendered June 14, 1977.

[Rule 4 7.3]

Solic.-16

QUESTION: Can an announcement be published of a free legalservices system for the elderly at various senior citizens' centers in a majorcity? The legal assistance will be performed by law students under thesupervision of a licensed Missouri attorney. The announcement shouldcontain language which indicates that if the case is a fee-generating case,referral will be made to the Lawyer's Reference Service or to a privateattorney of client's selection .

ANSWER: Yes, Rendered August 2, 1977.

[Rule 4 7.3]

Solic.-17

(Opinion omitted. See Notes on Use.)

Solic.-18

QUESTION: Can an attorney accept employment on a contingentfee basis with a school district for litigation against the County Assessor forallegedly under appraising commercial properties resulting in loss ofrevenue to said district? The proposed contingent fee contract would beapplicable to the increased revenue, if any, produced for only one year.

ANSWER: Yes. It is the opinion of the Advisory Committee thereis nothing ethically wrong in entering into a contingent fee contract with theschool district, provided the district is legally authorized to enter such acontract. The contract must result in a reasonable fee under DR2-106(B).The compensation could be computed upon a time/hourly basiscommensurate with the conditions, contingent upon a successful recovery.Rendered August 22, 1977.

[Rule 4 1.5(c)]

Solic.-19

(Opinion omitted. See Notes on Use.)

Solic.-20

QUESTION: Can the members of a Bar Association be polled andtheir names be included upon a list of attorneys who will accept courtappointments in criminal cases and defendants shown this list by the court?

ANSWER: Yes. The Committee is of the opinion that members ofthe Bar can furnish this information to the court and be listed on a listestablished by the court. Rendered September 1, 1977.

[Rule 4 7.3]

Solic.-21

(Opinion omitted. See Notes on Use.)

Solic.-22

(Opinion omitted. See Notes on Use.)

Solic.-23

(Set out at Adv.-28)

Solic.-24

(Opinion omitted. See Notes on Use.)

Solic.-25

(Opinion omitted. See Notes on Use.)

Solic.-26

(Opinion omitted. See Notes on Use.)

Solic.-27

(Opinion omitted. See Notes on Use.)

Solic.-28

(Opinion omitted. See Notes on Use.)

Solic.-29

(Opinion omitted. See Notes on Use.)

Solic.-30

(Opinion omitted. See Notes on Use.)

Solic.-31

(Opinion omitted. See Notes on Use.)

Solic.-32

(Opinion omitted. See Notes on Use.)

Solic.-33

QUESTION: A Missouri attorney represents a not-for-profitcorporation and as such he prepares sample will clauses for said corporationlo use in literature furnished by the corporation to prospective donors andcontributors to the charity.

May the attorney allow the corporation to include a statement tothe effect "that should a prospective contributor wish to name the charityas a beneficiary in a will in some manner other than is covered by thesample will clauses, the corporation will have a will clause drafted by thecounsel for the corporation to meet the specific needs outlined by theprospective contributor"?

ANSWER: No. It is the opinion of the Committee that if theprovisions which the testator desires in his will are other than "regular",then he should have his own attorney prepare the provisions rather thanthe corporation attorney. The Committee believes that if the testator hassome novel approach that he thinks would be appropriate, he should discussthat with independent counsel rather than have counsel for the corporationprepare the provisions for him. Rendered December 14, 1979.

[Rule 4 7.3]

Solic.-34

(Set out at Adv.-41)

Solic.-35

(Set out at Adv.-40)

Solic.-36

QUESTION: What should the attorney for plaintiff do in a willcontest case, where there are a number of potential plaintiffs, regardingcontacting and obtaining employment contracts?

ANSWER: It is the Committee's opinion that the attorney can tellthe clients that he already represents, who intend to contact other potentialplaintiffs in the will contest, to call or write the attorney requesting that herepresent them in the matter. The Committee believes the attorney shouldnot send employment contracts to the potential plaintiffs until after he hasbeen contacted directly by those parties concerning such representation.Rendered January 24, 1980.

[Rule 4 7.3]

Solic.-37

(Set out at Fees-32)

Solic.-38

(Opinion omitted. See Notes on Use.)

Solic.-39

A lawyer's parent wishes to initiate a program in the parent'schurch in which the lawyer would meet with the members of achurch-sponsored senior citizens group to give legal advice. The programwould be organized so the lawyer would schedule periodic office hours onthe church premises. During those office hours, members of the groupwould be able to consult privately and individually with the lawyerregarding their legal problems. The lawyer would receive no remunerationfor his participation in the program.

May the lawyer accept employment that results from participationin the program?

ANSWER: It appears to the Committee that what is proposed is agroup legal service program for an organization which might qualify for sucha program under Rule 4 of the Supreme Court of Missouri. The Committeesuggests counsel review DR2-103 of Rule 4. Rendered June 23, 1980.

[Rule 4 6.3; 7.3]

Solic.-40

(Set out at Adv.-45)

Solic.-41

(Set out at Adv.-46)

Solic.-42

QUESTION: Can an attorney ethically use a computerized incometax preparation service (service) where the service would, along with itsadvertising of other locations and outlets include the name, location andtelephone number of an attorney who is, in fact, utilizing the computerpreparation of tax returns, avoiding any reference in the advertising thata person at that location is an attorney and that the office is a law office?

In addition, can an attorney, under the facts stated in the aboveparagraph, divide the tax return preparation fee with the tax service ormust the attorney pay a set amount to the service for the preparation ofeach return and, finally, can the attorney have a sign in the window of hislaw office displaying the corporate name of the computerized tax servicewhich in fact indicates that the service is available on the premises?

ANSWER: It is the opinion of the Committee that an attorney canuse the computerized income tax preparation service if the client is advisedin advance and specifically waives the breach of confidentiality that such useobviously necessitates. The attorney cannot divide the fee on a percentagebasis with the computer service. He would have to pay the computer serviceseparately and then charge his client an appropriate total fee. It would beimproper for the service lo advertise the name, location and telephonenumber of the attorney using the service. It would also be improper for theattorney to have a sign in the window of his law office displaying thecorporate name of the computerized tax preparation service.

Rendered January 15, 1981.

[Rule 4 1.6; 5.4; 7.2]

Solic.-43

A general counsel for a group of churches submits the followinginquiry having ethical ramifications;

QUESTIONS:

1. The attorney is requested by one of the churches to conduct anestate planning seminar and speak on the subject of "why a person wouldneed a will" and answer questions. He specifically requests guidance as towhether or not he can draft estate plans for the persons in attendance.

2. If permitted to draft wills for those in attendance, can he suggestgifts to the institution for which he is general counsel?

3. Can he establish a "free legal clinic" for seminary students?

ANSWERS:

1. The Committee points out to counsel that he should considercertain questions before accepting the invitation to conduct the estateplanning seminar. First, the information given by the speaker at theseminar must be of a general nature and must not provide the answers tospecific questions profounded by persons in the audience.

2. If counsel is requested to draft estate plans for individualsattending the meeting, he may undertake such employment as the attorneyfor the individual. That individual would be expected to pay any fees thatcounsel charged. No one should suggest employment of said counsel bythose in attendance at the meeting. Suggestions by counsel that attendeesmake gifts to the institution employing counsel raises the specter of aconflict of interest and thus is improper.

3. The Committee suggests that counsel consider, as a vehicle forfurnishing legal services to Bible College students, a group legal plan underthe applicable sections of Rule 4. Rendered July 16, 1981.

[Rule 4 1.7; 6.3; 7.3]

Solic.-44

(Opinion omitted. See Notes on Use.)

Solic. -45

(Opinion omitted. See Notes on Use.)

Solic.-46

(Set out at Adv.-48)

Solic.-47

(Opinion omitted. See Notes on Use.)

Solic.-48

(Unrelated part 1 is not included.)

The collection agency for which the firm is handling accounts hasapproximately 300 creditors and approximately 75 of them are "out oftrust." The firm handling the accounts learned of the problems of thecollection agency and poses the following questions.

QUESTION 2. (a) Does the attorney have the authority to refuseto deal with the agency any further on any of the accounts that the firm ishandling?

ANSWER 2. (a): Yes, but he must notify the creditor of his refusalto do so.

QUESTION 2. (b) May the attorney write all of the creditors thathe is representing to inform them of the problem, even if he is not sure thatany of the creditors he is representing is included in the group that is "outof trust"?

ANSWER 2. (b): The above question is a legal question and notwithin our jurisdiction. The firm can communicate with the creditors it isrepresenting but the firm is cautioned about any allegations if the firm isnot sure of the exact facts.

QUESTION 2. (c) Can the firm write the creditors he isrepresenting informing them of the problem, if he knows that the creditorto whom he is writing is not included in the group that is "out of trust"?

ANSWER 2. (c): The same as 2. (b) above.

QUESTION 3. In the above letters to clients, will it be construedas an attempt by the attorney to solicit business from the creditors directlyso as to be "improper solicitation"?

ANSWER 3: It is proper for the attorney to communicate directlywith the creditor. If the attorney is representing the creditor, then hecertainly can advise the creditor that he would be glad to continue suchrepresentation in the future. Rendered April 14, 1983.

[Rule 4 1.6; 1.16; 7.3]