By Joe Forward, Legal Writer, State Bar of Wisconsin
Dec. 1, 2010 – Today, most law firms use law firm websites to market the firm and provide information to prospective clients. Recently, the State Bar’s Professional Ethics Committee (Committee) weighed in on whether a webinar on a law firm’s website creates a reasonable expectation of a lawyer-client relationship.
In Informal Ethics Opinion EI-10-01, the committee determined that lawyers must look to other sources of law in determining whether a webinar can create a lawyer-client relationship. The Rules of Professional Conduct do not address this situation specifically. In other words, contract law, not the professional conduct rules, will govern the lawyer-client relationship.
“This opinion is just a safety net for law firms that worry about this type of situation,” Ethics Counsel Tim Pierce said. “Often times, lawyers want something in writing to cover any situation that comes up in the future. This is one of those situations.”
According to the opinion, “the lawyer-client relationship is a contractual relationship that arises when a person seeks legal services from a lawyer and the lawyer agrees to provide those services or fails to decline to provide those services in the face of the person’s reasonable reliance.” The committee concluded that an informational webinar on a law firm’s website “does not, by itself, create a lawyer-client relationship.”
The committee believes it would be unreasonable to impose a lawyer-client relationship where the webinar is informational in nature, not specific to any one client, the law firm includes a disclaimer, and the client is forced to affirmatively agree to such disclaimer before viewing.
Would that analysis be different if the law firm charged a fee?
If the “process of ordering and paying for the webinar makes it clear that the purchaser is entering into a contract only for the right to view the webinar and not a contract for legal advice or consultation, then the answer is that a fee makes no difference,” EI-10-01 states.
However, the committee reminds lawyers of their responsibilities to prospective clients under Supreme Court Rule 20:1.18 – duties to prospective clients. SCR 20:1.18 determines that a person becomes a prospective client if discussions about representation take place.
In the committee’s view, a webinar would not constitute a “discussion” that would implicate SCR 20:1.18, as long as it is purely informational and a proper disclaimer is in place. Such a disclaimer would inform the client that viewing the webinar does not form a lawyer-client relationship.
Finally, the opinion points out that a webinar is a communication about the lawyer’s services, and therefore the webinar must comply with SCR 20:7.1, which determines that a lawyer “cannot make a false or misleading communication about the lawyer or the lawyer's services.”
For more information, contact Tim Pierce at the ethics hotline at (608) 250-6168 or (800) 444-9404, ext. 6168, Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Related:
