Comment
There is a potential for abuse inherent in direct solicitation by a lawyer in person or by telephone, telegraph, or facsimile transmission of prospective clients known to need legal services. Direct solicitation subjects the nonlawyer to the private importuning of a trained advocate, in a direct impersonal encounter. A prospective client often feels overwhelmed by the situation giving rise to the need for legal services and may have an impaired capacity for reason, judgment, and protective self-interest. Furthermore, the lawyer seeking to be retained is faced with a conflict stemming from the lawyer's own interest, which may color the advice and representation offered the vulnerable prospect.
The situation is therefore fraught with the possibility of undue influence, intimidation, and overreaching. This potential for abuse inherent in direct solicitation of prospective clients justifies some restrictions, particularly since the advertising permitted under Rule 7.2 offers an alternative means of communicating necessary information to those who may be in need of legal services. Advertising makes it possible for a prospective client to be informed about the need for legal services, and about the qualifications of available lawyers and law firms, without subjecting the prospective client to direct personal persuasion that may overwhelm the client's judgment. The use of general advertising, rather than direct private contact, to transmit information from lawyer to prospective client will help to assure that the information flows cleanly as well as freely. Advertising is in the public view and thus subject to scrutiny by those who know the lawyer. This informal review is likely to help guard against statements and claims that might constitute false or misleading communications in violation of Rule 7.1. Direct, private communications from a lawyer to a prospective client are not subject to such third-person scrutiny and consequently are much more likely to approach (and occasionally cross) the line between accurate representations and those that are false and misleading.
Direct written communication seeking employment by specific prospective clients generally presents less potential for abuse or overreaching than in-person solicitation and is therefore not prohibited for most types of legal matters, but is subject to reasonable restrictions, as set forth in this rule, designed to minimize or preclude abuse and overreaching and to ensure the lawyer's accountability if abuse should occur. This rule allows targeted mail solicitation of potential plaintiffs or claimants in personal injury and wrongful death causes of action or other causes of action that relate to an accident, disease, death, or injury, but only if the communication is not mailed until thirty (30) days after the incident. This restriction is reasonably required by the sensitized state of the potential clients, who may be either injured or grieving over the loss of a family member, and the abuses that experience has shown can exist in this type of solicitation.
Common examples of written communications that must meet the requirements of subparagraph (b) of this rule are direct mail solicitation sent to individuals or groups selected because they share common characteristics, e.g., persons named in traffic accident reports or notices of foreclosure. Communications not ordinarily sent on an unsolicited basis to prospective clients are not covered by this rule. Also not covered by this rule are responses by lawyers and law firms to requests for information from a prospective client or newsletters or brochures published for clients, former clients, those requesting it, or those with whom the lawyer or law firm has a familial or current or prior professional relationship.
Letters of solicitation and the envelopes in which they are mailed should be clearly marked “Advertisement.” This will avoid the perception by the recipient that there is a need to open the envelope because it is from a lawyer or law firm, when the envelope contains only a solicitation for legal services. With the envelopes and letters clearly marked “Advertisement,” the recipient can choose to read the solicitation or not to read it, without fear of legal repercussions.
In addition, the lawyer or law firm sending the letter of solicitation shall reveal the source of information used to determine that the recipient has a potential legal problem. Disclosure of the source will help the recipient to understand the extent of knowledge the lawyer or law firm has regarding the recipient's particular situation and will avoid misleading the recipient into believing that the lawyer has particularized knowledge about the recipient's matter if the lawyer does not.
General mailings to persons not known to need legal services, as well as mailings targeted to specific persons or potential clients, are permitted by this rule. However, these mailings constitute advertisement and are thus subject to the requirements of Rule 7.2 concerning delivery of copies to the general counsel, record keeping, inclusion of a disclaimer, and performance of the services offered at the advertised fee.
This Rule would not prohibit a lawyer from contacting representatives of organizations or groups that may be interested in establishing a group or prepaid legal plan for its 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 that the lawyer or the law firm is willing to offer. This form of communication is not directed to a specific prospective client known to need legal services related to a particular matter. 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.
Comment
Under Rule 8.5, Rule 7.3 applies to any lawyer or firm that solicits clients in Alabama, even if neither the lawyer nor the members of the lawyer's firm are admitted to practice in Alabama.
A "prospective client" as used in these Rules is someone whom the lawyer considers a potential client or someone whom the lawyer seeks to represent if given the opportunity. As an example, individuals who watch or hear a lawyer's commercial, view a lawyer's billboard, or access a lawyer's website are prospective clients in most instances.
"Solicitation" and "solicit" mean a communication from or on behalf of a lawyer or law firm that is directed to a specific person the lawyer or law firm knows or reasonably should know probably needs legal services in a particular matter and that offers to provide, or reasonably would be understood as offering to provide, legal services for that matter. General communications, such as billboards, television or radio advertisements, web pages, banner ads, social-media posts, blogs, and similar forms of communications that are not directed to a specific individual with a particular legal matter are not considered solicitation under these Rules. Rule 7.3 does not apply if a prospective client initiates contact with the lawyer without any solicitation by the lawyer or by an agent, representative, or other intermediary of the lawyer. A lawyer's communication does not constitute solicitation under Rule 7.3 if it is in response to a request for information by a prospective client that itself was not the result of any solicitation by the lawyer, or by an agent, representative, or other intermediary of the lawyer, or if the communication was automatically generated in response to an internet search.
As used in this Rule, "lawyer" includes the lawyer's firm.
Even permitted forms of solicitation can violate these Rules if the solicitation contains false or misleading information.
There is a potential for abuse inherent in a live, person-to-person, direct, or realtime solicitation by a lawyer of a prospective client known to need legal services. These forms of solicitation subject the prospective client to the private importuning of a trained advocate in a direct interpersonal encounter. A prospective client often feels overwhelmed by the situation giving rise to the need for legal services and may have an impaired capacity for reason, judgment, and protective self-interest. Furthermore, the lawyer seeking to be retained is faced with a conflict stemming from the lawyer's own interest, which may color the advice and representation offered the vulnerable prospective client. The situation is fraught with the possibility of undue influence, intimidation, and overreaching. This potential for abuse inherent in direct solicitation of a prospective client justifies some restrictions, particularly because the communications permitted under Rule 7.2 offer an alternative means of communicating necessary information to a person who may be in need of legal services. Advertising makes it possible for a prospective client to be informed about the need for legal services, and about the qualifications of available lawyers and law firms, without subjecting the prospective client to direct personal persuasion that may impair or overwhelm the client's judgment.
Communications by a lawyer seeking employment by a prospective client that are not real-time or in-person solicitations generally present less potential for abuse or overreaching than in-person or real-time solicitations and are therefore not prohibited for most types of legal matters, but are subject to reasonable restrictions, as set forth in these Rules, designed to minimize or preclude abuse and overreaching and to ensure the lawyer's accountability if abuse should occur. Email communications, for example, are not real-time, person-to-person communications prohibited under Rule 7.3(a), but they still are subject to the other provisions and requirements of these Rules. A communication with a potential client who initiates the contact by using a chat box or other interactive feature of a lawyer's website also would not be a prohibited solicitation if the communication complies with the other applicable provisions and requirements of these Rules. In contrast, text communications initiated by or for the lawyer are real-time, person-to-person solicitations and are prohibited under Rule 7.3(a).
This Rule allows targeted-mail solicitation of prospective clients in personal-injury and wrongful-death causes of action or other causes of action that relate to an accident, disaster, death, or injury, subject to the requirements of these Rules, but only if the communication is not made until twenty-one (21) days after the incident. This restriction is reasonably required by the sensitized state of the prospective client, who may be either injured or grieving over the loss of a family member, and by the abuses that experience has shown can exist in this type of solicitation.
This Rule prohibits a lawyer from interfering, or allowing another person to interfere, with another lawyer's current attorney-client relationship in a matter. It is prohibited for a lawyer to seek to obtain legal employment by attempting to convince or persuade the client of a different lawyer in a matter to hire him or her in that same matter or to terminate the client's relationship with the client's current lawyer in that matter, or for the lawyer to allow any other person to do so. This Rule does not prevent a lawyer from seeking future legal work from a client of another lawyer.
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 its members, insureds, beneficiaries, or other third parties for the purpose of informing such organizations or groups of the availability of and details concerning the plan or arrangement that the lawyer or the law firm is willing to offer. This form of communication is not directed to a specific prospective client known to need legal services related to a particular matter. 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 that the lawyer undertakes in communicating with such representatives and the type of information transmitted to the organization's or group's members are functionally similar to, and serve the same purpose as, the communications permitted under Rule 7.2.
This Rule does not prohibit communications ordered by a court or by any other official tribunal recognized by the Office of General Counsel of the Alabama State Bar.
This Rule does not prohibit a lawyer from referring clients to another lawyer or a nonlawyer professional pursuant to a reciprocal referral agreement if the agreement is not exclusive, the client is fully informed in writing of the existence and nature of the agreement prior to the referral and agrees to the referral, and the referral does not otherwise violate these Rules. A targeted or direct-mail communication is one that is prompted by a specific occurrence. Direct-mail or email advertisements sent out generally to the public, such as bulk mailers to a specific zip code, are not targeted communications unless the lawyer knows the recipients have a specific legal problem.
Disclosures under Rule 7.3(e)(7) must be reasonably specific. Some nonexhaustive examples include: if a lawyer obtained a prospective client's name from a police accident report, any solicitation permitted by these Rules should state that the name was obtained from a "police accident report," rather than a general reference to "public records"; if a prospective client's name is obtained from a jail-inmates list or booking log, that should be stated in the communication; if a prospective client's name was obtained from a foreclosure list in a specific newspaper, the disclosure should state that the lawyer obtained the name from "foreclosure list in [name of newspaper]."
A lawyer is required to know, and is assumed to know, the content and manner of delivery of any communication by or for the lawyer that is subject to this Rule. Ignorance of or misunderstanding of how the communication was used or disseminated or what was in the communication does not absolve the lawyer of responsibility for the communication unless the lawyer's ignorance or misunderstanding was reasonable.
"Prominently" means not hidden and not presented in a manner that makes it more difficult for the listener or viewer to hear or see the required information than it is to hear or see the other information in the communication.
Comparison with Former Alabama Code of Professional Responsibility
There is no comparable rule in the former Alabama Code of Professional Responsibility. Rule 7.3, before its amendment effective May 1, 1996, was a direct counterpart to Temporary DR 2-103, which was substantially adopted from Model Rule 7.3. The amendment effective May 1, 1996, changed the rule substantially from what was Temporary DR 2-103.
Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending Rule 7.3(b)(1), effective February 19, 2009, is published in that volume of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama cases from 999 So.2d.
Note from the reporter of decisions: The order amending Rule 7.1, Rule 7.2, the Comment to Rule 7.2, Rule 7.3, the Comment to Rule 7.3, Rule 8.5, and the Comment to Rule 8.5, Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct; adopting the Comment to Rule 7.1, Alabama Rules of Professional Conduct, as Amended Effective January 1, 2026; and amending Rule 1(a)(1), Alabama Rules of Disciplinary Procedure, effective January 1, 2026, is published in that volume of Alabama Reporter that contains Alabama cases from __ So. 3d.
