Rule 7.3. Solicitation of Clients

 

Colorado Court Rules
Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct
Information about Legal Services

As amended through Rule Change 2020(29), effective October 2020.

 

(a) “Solicitation” or “solicit” denotes a communication initiated by or on behalf of a lawyer or

law firm that is directed to a specific person the lawyer knows or reasonably should know needs

legal services in a particular matter and that offers to provide, or reasonably can be understood as

offering to provide, legal services for that matter.

 

(b) A lawyer shall not solicit professional employment by live person-to-person contact when a

significant motive for the lawyer’s doing so is the lawyer’s or law firm’s pecuniary gain, unless

the contact is with a:

(1) lawyer;

(2) person who has a family, close personal, or prior business or professional relationship with

the lawyer or law firm; or

(3) person who routinely uses for business purposes the type of legal services offered by the

lawyer.

 

(c) A lawyer shall not solicit professional employment even when not otherwise prohibited by

paragraph (b), if:

(1) the target of the solicitation has made known to the lawyer a desire not to be solicited by the

lawyer; or

(2) the solicitation involves coercion, duress or harassment.

 

(d) A lawyer shall not engage in solicitation by any media for professional employment,

concerning personal injury or wrongful death of any person. See § 13-93-111, C.R.S. This Rule

7.3(d) shall not apply if the lawyer has a family or prior business or professional relationship

with the person or if the communication is issued more than 30 days after the occurrence of the

event for which the legal representation is being solicited. Any such communication must

comply with the following:

(1) no such communication may be made if the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the

person to whom the communication is directed is represented by a lawyer in the matter; and

(2) if a lawyer other than the lawyer whose name or signature is contained in the communication

will actually handle the case or matter, or if the case or matter will be referred to another lawyer

or law firm, any such communication shall include a statement so advising the prospective client.

 

(e) This Rule does not prohibit communications authorized by law or ordered by a court or other

tribunal.

 

(f) Every communication from a lawyer soliciting professional employment shall:

(1) include the words “Advertising Material” on the outside envelope, if any, and at the

beginning and ending of any recorded or electronic communication, unless the recipient of the

communication is a person specified in paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2) or (b)(3);

(2) not reveal on the envelope or on the outside of a self-mailing brochure or pamphlet the nature

of the person’s legal problem; and

(3) be maintained for a period of five years from the date of dissemination of the communication,

and include a copy or recording of each such communication and a sample of the envelope, if

any, in which the communication is enclosed, unless the recipient of the communication is a

person specified in paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2) or (b)(3).

 

(g) Notwithstanding the prohibitions in this Rule, a lawyer may participate with a prepaid or

group legal service plan operated by an organization not owned or directed by the lawyer that

uses live person-to-person contact to enroll members or sell subscriptions for the plan from

persons who are not known to need legal services in a particular matter covered by the plan.

 

Comment

[1] Paragraph (b) prohibits a lawyer from soliciting professional employment by live person-toperson contact when a significant motive for the lawyer’s doing so is the lawyer’s or the law

firm’s pecuniary gain. A lawyer’s communication is not a solicitation if it is directed to the

general public, such as through a billboard, an Internet banner advertisement, a website or a

television commercial, or if it is in response to a request for information or is automatically

generated in response to electronic searches.

 

[2] “Live person-to-person contact” means in-person, face-to-face, live telephone and other

real-time visual or auditory person-to-person communications where the person is subject to a

direct personal encounter without time for reflection. Such person-to-person contact does not

include chat rooms, text messages or other written communications that recipients may easily

disregard. A potential for overreaching exists when a lawyer, seeking pecuniary gain, solicits a

person known to be in need of legal services. This form of contact subjects a person to the

private importuning of the trained advocate in a direct interpersonal encounter. The person, who

may already feel overwhelmed by the circumstances giving rise to the need for legal services,

may find it difficult to fully evaluate all available alternatives with reasoned judgment and

appropriate self-interest in the face of the lawyer’s presence and insistence upon an immediate

response. The situation is fraught with the possibility of undue influence, intimidation, and

overreaching.

 

[3] The potential for overreaching inherent in live person-to-person contact justifies its

prohibition, since lawyers have alternative means of conveying necessary information. In

particular, communications can be mailed or transmitted by email or other electronic means that

do not violate other laws. These forms of communications make it possible for the public to be

informed about the need for legal services, and about the qualifications of available lawyers and

law firms, without subjecting the public to live person-to-person persuasion that may overwhelm

a person’s judgment.

 

[4] The contents of live person-to-person contact can be disputed and may not be subject to

third-party scrutiny. Consequently, they are much more likely to approach (and occasionally

cross) the dividing line between accurate representations and those that are false and misleading.

 

[5] There is far less likelihood that a lawyer would engage in overreaching against a former

client, or a person with whom the lawyer has a close personal, family, business or professional

relationship, or in situations in which the lawyer is motivated by considerations other than the

lawyer’s pecuniary gain. Nor is there a serious potential for overreaching when the person

contacted is a lawyer or is known to routinely use the type of legal services involved for business

purposes. Examples include persons who routinely hire outside counsel to represent the entity;

entrepreneurs who regularly engage business, employment law or intellectual property lawyers;

small business proprietors who routinely hire lawyers for lease or contract issues; and other

people who routinely retain lawyers for business transactions or formations. Paragraph (b) is not

intended to prohibit a lawyer from participating in constitutionally protected activities of public

or charitable legal service organizations or bona fide political, social, civic, fraternal, employee

or trade organizations whose purposes include providing or recommending legal services to their

members or beneficiaries.

 

[6] A solicitation that contains false or misleading information within the meaning of Rule 7.1,

that involves coercion, duress or harassment within the meaning of Rule 7.3(c)(2), or that

involves contact with someone who has made known to the lawyer a desire not to be solicited by

the lawyer within the meaning of Rule 7.3(c)(1) is prohibited. Live, person-to-person contact of

individuals who may be especially vulnerable to coercion or duress is ordinarily not appropriate,

for example, the elderly, those whose first language is not English, or the disabled.

 

[7] This Rule does not prohibit a lawyer from contacting representatives of organizations or

groups that may be interested in establishing a group or prepaid legal plan for their members,

insureds, beneficiaries or other third parties for the purpose of informing such entities of the

availability of and details concerning the plan or arrangement which the lawyer or lawyer’s firm

is willing to offer. This form of communication is not directed to people who are seeking legal

services for themselves. Rather, it is usually addressed to an individual acting in a fiduciary

capacity seeking a supplier of legal services for others who may, if they choose, become

prospective clients of the lawyer. Under these circumstances, the activity which the lawyer

undertakes in communicating with such representatives and the type of information transmitted

to the individual are functionally similar to and serve the same purpose as advertising permitted

under Rule 7.2.

 

[8] Communications authorized by law or ordered by a court or tribunal include a notice to

potential members of a class in class action litigation.

 

[9] Paragraph (g) of this Rule permits a lawyer to participate with an organization which uses

personal contact to enroll members for its group or prepaid legal service plan, provided that the

personal contact is not undertaken by any lawyer who would be a provider of legal services

through the plan. The organization must not be owned by or directed (whether as manager or

otherwise) by any lawyer or law firm that participates in the plan. For example, paragraph (g)

would not permit a lawyer to create an organization controlled directly or indirectly by the

lawyer and use the organization for the person-to-person solicitation of legal employment of the

lawyer through memberships in the plan or otherwise. The communication permitted by these

organizations must not be directed to a person known to need legal services in a particular

matter, but must be designed to inform potential plan members generally of another means of

affordable legal services. Lawyers who participate in a legal service plan must reasonably assure

that the plan sponsors are in compliance with Rules 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3(c).

 

Cite as RPC 7.3

History. Entire rule and comment amended and adopted and committee comment deleted by amendment June 12, 1997, effective January 1, 1998; entire Appendix repealed and readopted April 12, 2007, effective January 1, 2008; Rule 7.3(b) and (d) amended effective April 6, 2016; amended February 22, 2018, effective February 22, 2018. Amended and Adopted by the Court, En Banc, September 10, 2020, effective immediately