Ethics Opinions
Iowa Supreme Court Board of Professional Ethics and Conduct
Date of Opinion:
03/12/2003
Opinion Number:
03-04
Title:
ADVERTISING: PROPOSED LETTER TO SELF-INSURED EMPLOYERS
Opinion:
You propose to write to the 88 Iowa firms identified by the Iowa Insurance Commissioner as self-insured for Workers’ Compensation. Your proposed communication does not identify you as a lawyer and your return address on the proposed communication is not your firm’s office address but apparently your home address.
Your proposed communication would advise that in most states, self-insured employers have banded together to form an association “to form and pursue common strategies for managing the cost of worker compensation.” You state self-insured associations have been formed in at least 34 states, certain other states have state-run monopolies on workers’ compensation and that ten states with associations of self-insured employers are less populous than Iowa. Your proposed communication asks “Do you think such an association should be formed in Iowa?” You then ask if the reader would be interested in attending a meeting of self-insured employers in Des Moines to discuss the formation of an association of Iowa self-insured employers. You advise you would aid in arranging such a meeting.
You ask whether the proposed communication constitutes a written solicitation so as to be subject to the provisions of DR 2-101(B)(4)(b). DR 2-101(B)(4)(b) provides “A lawyer may engage in written solicitation by direct mail to persons or groups who may need specific legal services because of a condition or occurrence known to the soliciting lawyer.” However, the Code requires that prior to the solicitation the lawyer must file the proposed solicitation with the Board of Professional Ethics and Conduct for a finding.
Whether or nor you identify yourself as a lawyer in the proposed communication, you are, in fact, a lawyer, and your proposed communication is for the purpose of forming an association of employers with a similar interest. That similar interest as indicated in your proposed communication is “to form and pursue common strategies for managing the cost of worker compensation.” Though not specifically mentioned any “common strategy for managing the cost of worker compensation” would involve lobbying the State Legislature and developing common strategies for defending workers’ compensation claims – matters involving the practice of law. It is thus the opinion of the Board that your proposed communication is the sort of communication contemplated by DR 2-101(B)(4)(b) and your proposed communication would have to be submitted to the Board for the finding prescribed by such section.
It is further the opinion of the Board that should you submit your proposed communication to the Board for the finding required by DR 2-101(B)(4)(b), the Board’s designee would find that if your letter correctly identified you as a lawyer and set out your firm name and address, your letter would not be found to be false, deceptive, or misleading and you would be able to send that letter to the Iowa firms self-insured for workers’ compensation. You would, however, be required to identify each of the proposed recipients and demonstrate that each was reported to be self-insured by the Iowa Insurance Commissioner.