Differences from ABA Model Rules
| Rule 1.2(c) Limited Scope | Significant Changes |
| Rule 5.4(a) Fee-Sharing | Minor Clerical Changes |
| Rules 5.4(b)-(d) Non-Lawyer Ownership | Same as Model Rule |
| Rule 5.5. Unauthorized Practice of Law | Significant Changes |
| Rule 5.7 Law Related Services | Same as Model Rule |
| Rule 6.5 Limited Scope | Significant Changes |
| Rule 7.2(b) Lawyer Referral | Significant Changes |
| Cloud Computing Advisory | No |
| Technology Competency Rules | Yes |
ABA Rule 1.2(c) (Limited Scope)
RULE 1.2 SCOPE OF REPRESENTATION AND ALLOCATION OF AUTHORITY BETWEEN CLIENT AND LAWYER
…
(c)A lawyer may limit the scope of the representation if the client consents in writing after consultation.
Relevant Comments:
[6] The scope of services to be provided by a lawyer may be limited by agreement with the client or by the terms under which the lawyer’s services are made available to the client. Paragraph (c) allows the lawyer to limit the scope of representation if the client consents. When a lawyer has been retained by an insurer to represent an insured, for example, the representation may be limited to matters related to the insurance coverage. A limited representation may be appropriate because the client has limited objectives for the representation. In addition, terms upon which representation is undertaken may exclude specific means that might otherwise be used to accomplish the client’s objectives. Such limitations may exclude actions that the client thinks are too costly or that the lawyer regards as repugnant or imprudent.
[7] Although an agreement for a limited representation does not exempt a lawyer from the duty to provide competent representation, the limitation is a factor to be considered when determining the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation. See Rule 1.1.
[8] All agreements concerning a lawyer’s representation of a client must accord with these Rules and other law. See, e.g., Rules 1.1, 1.8 and 5.6.
Modified By:
N.D. Ethics Op. 12-01 (2012);
ABA Rule 5.4(a) (Fee-sharing)
RULE 5.4 PROFESSIONAL INDEPENDENCE OF A LAWYER
(a) A lawyer or law firm shall not share legal fees with a nonlawyer, except that:
(1) An agreement by a lawyer with the lawyer’s firm, partners, or associate may provide for the payment of money, over a reasonable period of time after the lawyer’s death, to the lawyer’s estate or to one or more specified persons;
(2) A lawyer who purchases the practice of a deceased, disabled, or disappeared lawyer may, under Rule 1.17, pay to the estate or other representatives of that lawyer the agreed-upon purchase price;
(3) A lawyer or law firm may include nonlawyer employees in a compensation or retirement plan, even though the plan is based in whole or in part on the profit-sharing arrangement; and
(4) A lawyer may share court-awarded legal fees with a nonprofit organization that employed, retained, or recommended employment of the lawyer in the matter.
Relevant Comments:
[1] The provisions of this Rule express traditional limitations on sharing fees. These limitations are to protect the lawyer’s professional independence of judgment. Where someone other than the client pays the lawyer’s fee or salary, or recommends employment of the lawyer, that arrangement does not modify the lawyer’s obligation to the client. As stated in paragraph (c), such arrangements should not interfere with the lawyer’s professional judgment.
Modified By:
In re Holmes, 304 B.R. 292 (Bankr. N.D. Miss. 2004) (lawyer paid nonlawyer employees incentive bonuses of $5 for each signed retainer agreement or durable power of attorney)
In re McCray, 755 N.W.2d 835 (N.D. 2008) (lawyer paid almost all his gross legal fees to company running credit-repair seminars at which it would recommend lawyer’s services)
ABA Rule 5.4(b – d) Non-lawyer ownership
RULE 5.4 PROFESSIONAL INDEPENDENCE OF A LAWYER
…
(d) A lawyer shall not practice with or in the form of a professional corporation or association authorized to practice law for a profit, if:
(1) A nonlawyer owns any interest therein, except that a fiduciary representative of the estate of a lawyer may hold the stock or interest of the lawyer for a reasonable time during administration;
(2) A nonlawyer is a corporate director or officer thereof or holds a position of similar responsibility in any form of association other than a corporation; or
(3) A nonlawyer has the right to direct or control the professional judgment of a lawyer.
Relevant Comments:
[2] This Rule also expresses traditional limitations on permitting a third party to direct or regulate the lawyer’s professional judgment in rendering legal services to another. See also Rule 1.8(f).
Modified By:
N.D. Ethics Op. 00-09 (2000) (lawyer may not take salaried position with nonlawyer title company to review abstracts and prepare opinions, with title company billing set fee to buyers and sellers)
ABA Rule 5.5 (UPL)
RULE 5.5 UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW
(a) A lawyer shall not practice law in a jurisdiction where doing so violates the regulation of the legal profession in that jurisdiction.
(b) A lawyer admitted to practice in another jurisdiction and not in this jurisdiction who performs legal services in this jurisdiction on a temporary basis does not engage in the unauthorized practice of law in this jurisdiction when:
(1) the lawyer who is an employee of a client, acts on the client’s behalf, or on behalf of the client’s commonly owned affiliates, except for work for which pro hac vice admission or registration under Admission to Practice R.3 is required;
(2) the lawyer acts with respect to a matter that arises out of the lawyer’s representation of a client in a jurisdiction in which the lawyer is admitted to practice, except for work for which pro hac vice admission or registration under Admission to Practice R.3 is required;
(3) with respect to matters for which registration or pro hac vice admission is available under Admission to Practice R.3, the lawyer is authorized to represent a client or is preparing for a matter in which the lawyer reasonably expects to be so authorized;
(4) with respect to matters, transactions or proceedings pending in or substantially related to this jurisdiction and for which pro hac vice admission is not available under Admission to Practice R.3, the lawyer is associated in the matter, transaction or proceeding with a lawyer admitted to practice in this jurisdiction who actively participates in the representation of the client in the matter, transaction or proceeding; or
(5) the lawyer performs a service that may be performed by a person without a license to practice law or without other authorization from a federal, state or local governmental body.
(c) A lawyer admitted to practice in another United States jurisdiction or in a foreign jurisdiction but not in this jurisdiction, who establishes an office or whose presence is other than temporary in this jurisdiction does not engage in the unauthorized practice of law in this jurisdiction when:
(1) the lawyer who is an employee of a client, acts on the client’s behalf, or on behalf of the client’s commonly owned affiliates, and the lawyer is eligible for and has complied with the lawyer registration rules under Admission to Practice R.3; and when the lawyer is a foreign lawyer and the services require advice on the law of this or another U.S. jurisdiction or of the United States, provided that the advice must be based upon the advice of a lawyer who is duly licensed and authorized by this jurisdiction to provide the advice, or
(2) the lawyer renders services in this jurisdiction pursuant to other authority granted by federal law or a law or Court rule of this jurisdiction.
(d) A lawyer who is not admitted to practice in this jurisdiction shall not represent or hold out to the public that the lawyer is admitted to practice law in this jurisdiction. A lawyer who practices law in this jurisdiction under paragraph(b) or (c) shall disclose in writing to the client that the lawyer is not licensed in this jurisdiction.
(e) A lawyer shall not assist another person in the unauthorized practice of law.
(f) For purposes of paragraph (c), the foreign lawyer must be a member in good standing of a recognized legal profession in a foreign jurisdiction, the members of which are admitted to practice as lawyers or counselors at law or the equivalent and are subject to effective regulation and discipline by a duly constituted professional body or a public authority.
Relevant Comments:
[1] Paragraph (a) states the general rule that each state judiciary may regulate the legal profession within the borders of the jurisdiction. A lawyer may regularly practice law only in a jurisdiction in which the lawyer is admitted to practice. The practice of law in violation of lawyer-licensing standards of another jurisdiction constitutes a violation of these Rules. This Rule does not restrict the ability of lawyers authorized by federal statute or other federal law to represent the interests of the United States or other persons in any jurisdiction.
[2] There are occasions when out-of state lawyers perform services in this state on a temporary basis under circumstances that do not create a significant risk of harm to clients, the courts, or the public. Paragraph (b) identifies five situations in which the out-of-state lawyer may perform services in this state without fear of violating this Rule. By creating these five specific “safe harbors” for multijurisdictional practice, this Rule does not address the question of whether other conduct constitutes the unauthorized practice of law. The fact that conduct is not specifically included or described in this Rule is not intended to imply that such conduct is the unauthorized practice of law. Nothing in this Rule is intended to authorize a lawyer to establish an office or or other permanent presence in this jurisdiction without being admitted to practice here. In addition, nothing in this Rule is intended to authorize an out-of-state lawyer to solicit clients in this jurisdiction.
[3] Paragraph (b)(1) permits in-house corporate counsel and governmental lawyers to represent their employers and their employers’ commonly-owned affiliates on a temporary basis without being admitted to the bar of this state. The safe harbor in this rule does not cover appearances in court or other work for which pro hac vice admission or registration is required under Admission to Practice R.3.
[4] Paragraph (b) (2) is intended to provide broad protection to several kinds of work in this jurisdiction that are related to the lawyer’s work in the lawyer’s home state, such as negotiations, contracts, depositions and other forms of discovery, witness interviews, and meetings with clients or other parties to a transaction. The Rule recognizes that it should be sufficient to rely on the lawyer’s jurisdiction of licensure as the jurisdiction with the primary responsibility to ensure the lawyer has the requisite character and fitness to practice law. Also, the Rule recognizes that a client should be able to have a single lawyer conduct all aspects of a transaction, even if the lawyer must travel to other states. The safe harbor in this paragraph, however, does not cover transactions that are pending in or substantially related to this state. For these state-related transactions, the out-of-state lawyer is required to seek admission or to associate with a licensed North Dakota lawyer as co-counsel in the representation of the client in the transaction. See paragraph (b)(4).
[5] Paragraph (b)(3) requires out-of-state lawyers to be admitted pro hac vice under Admission to Practice R.3 to appear in all matters pending in a tribunal or administrative agency in this state. This Rule provides a temporary safe harbor to a lawyer acting on a client’s behalf in preparatory matters before pro hac vice admission, so long as the lawyer reasonably expects to be so admitted. Such preparatory work might include factual investigations and discovery in connection with litigation or an administrative proceeding where the lawyer reasonably expects to be admitted pro hac vice.
[6] Paragraph (b)(4) requires the out-of-state lawyer to associate with a duly licensed local lawyer for all transactions that are pending in or substantially related to this jurisdiction and for which pro hac vice admission is not available. The Rule recognizes that association with a lawyer licensed in this jurisdiction is likely to protect the interests of both clients and the public. The local lawyer may not serve merely as a conduit for the out-of state lawyer, but must actively participate in and share actual responsibility for the representation of the client in the matter. If the licensed lawyer’s involvement is merely pro forma, then both lawyers are subject to discipline under this Rule.
[7] Paragraph (b)(5) allows an out-of-state lawyer to perform services that a person who is not a lawyer may perform without a law license or other authorization from a federal, state, or local governmental body, e.g., in private alternative dispute resolution contexts, a non-lawyer may serve as a mediator or arbitrator. In some administrative proceedings, a non-lawyer is permitted by law to appear on behalf of a party. The Rule assumes that the public is adequately protected in these instances by the over-arching provisions of Rule 8.5, which subjects all lawyers performing any services in this jurisdiction to the Rules of Professional Conduct. If, for example, an out-of-state lawyer performing as a neutral engages in conduct in violation of these Rules, the lawyer could be disciplined for the misconduct, even if serving as the neutral was not the unauthorized practice of law under this Rule. It should be noted that whereas an out-of-state lawyer who represents a client in ADR proceedings pending in another jurisdiction would be covered by the safe harbor in this Rule, an out-of-state lawyer who represents a client in an ADR proceeding in North Dakota must comply with Admission to Practice R.3. See paragraph (b)(3).
[8] Paragraph (c) creates two categories of allowable multijurisdictional practice for out-of state lawyers who establish an office or other permanent presence in the state: 1) in-house counsel who comply with registration rules, and 2) lawyers performing services pursuant to federal or state law or court rule.
[9] Paragraph (c)(1) creates a safe harbor for in-house corporate counsel or other employed lawyers who establish an office or other permanent presence in the state, provided they comply with the registration rules under Admission to Practice R.3. If the out-of state lawyer is not eligible for registration under Rule 3, this safe harbor would not apply and the lawyer must seek licensure in this jurisdiction. Paragraph (c)(1) also creates a safe harbor when legal services are performed by a foreign lawyer and require advice on the law of other jurisdictions. To decrease any risk to the client, when advising on the domestic law of a United States jurisdiction or on the law of the United States, a foreign lawyer authorized to provide legal services under paragraph (c)(1) must base the advice on the advice of a lawyer licensed in this jurisdiction.
[10] Paragraph (c) (2) permits out-of-state-lawyers to provide legal services in this state when authorized to do so by federal law or state law or court rule.
[11] Lawyers who are not licensed to practice law in this jurisdiction must not represent or hold themselves out to the public as licensed to practice law in this jurisdiction. Paragraph (d) requires out-of-state lawyers practicing law in North Dakota under one of the safe harbors in paragraphs (b) and (c) to disclose in writing to their clients that they are not licensed in this state.
[12] Limiting the practice of law to members of the bar protects the public from unqualified persons performing legal services. Paragraph (e) does not prohibit a lawyer from employing the services of paraprofessionals and delegating functions to them, so long as the lawyer supervises the delegated work and retains responsibility for it. See Rule 5.3. Lawyers may also provide professional advice and instruction to nonlawyers whose employment requires knowledge of law; for example, claims adjusters, employees of financial or commercial institutions, social workers, accountants and employees of government agencies. Lawyers may assist independent nonlawyers authorized by law to provide particular legal services, for example, paraprofessionals authorized to provide some kinds of legal services. In addition, a lawyer may counsel nonlawyers who wish to represent themselves.
[13] Lawyers desiring to provide pro bono legal services on a temporary basis in a jurisdiction that has been affected by a major disaster, but in which they are not otherwise authorized to practice law, as well as lawyers from the affected jurisdiction who seek to practice law temporarily in another jurisdiction, but in which they are not otherwise authorized to practice law, should consult Admission to Practice R. 3.2.
Modified By:
Blume Const., Inc. v. State ex rel. Job Service North Dakota, 872 N.W.2d 312 (N.D. 2015) (out-of-state lawyer filed administrative appeal request for North Dakota corporation)
Carlson v. Workforce Safety & Ins., 765 N.W.2d 691 (N.D. 2009) (out-of-state lawyers’ preparation of motion for reconsideration, filing of legal brief, and designation as counsel in administrative proceeding were not protected by safe-harbor provisions given that lawyers failed to timely seek pro hac vice admission as required).
Gerber v. Disciplinary Bd. of N.D. Supreme Court, 868 N.W.2d 861 (N.D. 2015) (law firm designated out-of-state lawyer as “staff attorney”)
In re Giese, 709 N.W.2d 717 (N.D. 2006) (suspended lawyer engaged in unauthorized practice by holding himself out as being authorized to practice)
In re Overboe, 844 N.W.2d 851 (N.D. 2014) (suspended lawyer initiated collection proceeding)
Ranta v. McCarney, 391 N.W.2d 161 (N.D. 1986) (Minnesota lawyer could not recover fees for legal services rendered in North Dakota, where lawyer not licensed)
Other Definitions:
State v. Niska, 380 N.W.2d 646 (N.D. 1986) – what constitutes the practice of law does not lend itself to an inclusive definition.
ABA Rule 5.7 (Law Related Services)
Same as Model Rule.
Relevant Comments:
[1] When a lawyer performs law-related services or controls an organization that does so, there exists the potential for ethical problems. Principal among these is the possibility that the person for whom the law-related services are performed fails to understand that the services may not carry with them the protections normally afforded as part of the client-lawyer relationship. The recipient of the law-related services may expect, for example, that the protection of client confidences, prohibitions against representation of persons with conflicting interests, and obligations of a lawyer to maintain professional independence apply to the provision of law-related services when that may not be the case. Rule 5.7 applies to the provision of law-related services by a lawyer even when the lawyer does not provide any legal services to the person for whom the law-related services are performed and whether the law-related services are performed through a law firm or a separate entity. The Rule identifies the circumstances in which all of these Rules apply to the provision of law-related services. Even when those circumstances do not exist, however, the conduct of a lawyer involved in the provision of law-related services is subject to those Rules that apply generally to lawyer conduct, regardless of whether the conduct involves the provision of legal services. See, e.g., Rule 8.4.
[2] When law-related services are provided by a lawyer under circumstances that are not distinct from the lawyer’s provision of legal services to clients, the lawyer in providing the law-related services must adhere to the requirements of these Rules as provided in paragraph (a)(1). Even when the law-related and legal services are provided in circumstances that are distinct from each other, for example through separate entities or different support staff with the law firm, these Rules apply to the lawyer as provided in paragraph (a)(2) unless the lawyer takes reasonable measures to assure that the recipient of the law-related services knows that the services are not legal services and that the protections of the lawyer-client relationship do not apply.
[3] Law-related services also may be provided through an entity that is distinct from that through which the lawyer provides legal services. If the lawyer individually or with others has control of such an entity’s operations, the Rule requires the lawyer to take reasonable measures to assure that each person using the services of the entity knows that the services provided by the entity are not legal services and that the Rules relating to the lawyer-client relationship do not apply. A lawyer’s control of an entity extends to the ability to direct its operation. Whether a lawyer has such control will depend upon the circumstances of the particular case.
[4] When a client-lawyer relationship exists with a person who is referred by a lawyer to a separate law-related service entity controlled by the lawyer, individually or with others, the lawyer must comply with Rule 1.8(a).
[5] In taking the reasonable measures referred to in paragraph (a)(2) to assure that a person using law-related services understands the practical effect or significance of the inapplicability of these Rules, the lawyer should communicate to the person receiving the law-related services, in a manner sufficient to assure that the person understands the significance of the fact, that the relationship of the person to the business entity will not be a client-lawyer relationship. The communication should be made before entering into an agreement for provision of or providing law-related services, and preferably should be in writing.
[6] Regardless of the sophistication of potential recipients of law-related services, a lawyer should take special care to keep separate the provision of law-related and legal services in order to minimize the risk that the recipient will assume that the law-related services are legal services. The risk of such confusion is especially acute when the lawyer renders both types of services with respect to the same matter. Under some circumstances the legal and law-related services may be so closely entwined that they cannot be distinguished from each other, and the requirement of disclosure and consultation imposed by paragraph (a)(2) of the Rule cannot be met. In such a case a lawyer will be responsible for assuring that both the lawyer’s conduct and, to the extent required by Rule 5.3, that of nonlawyer employees in the distinct entity which the lawyer controls complies in all respects with these Rules.
[7] A broad range of economic and other interests of clients may be served by lawyers engaging in the delivery of law-related services. Examples of law-related services include providing ADR services, title insurance, financial planning, accounting, trust services, real estate counseling, legislative lobbying, economic analysis, social work, tax return preparation, and patent, medical or environmental consulting. When a lawyer is obliged to accord the recipients of such services the protections of those Rules that apply to the client-lawyer relationship, the lawyer must take special care to heed the proscriptions of the Rules addressing conflict of interest [Rule 1.7 through 1.11, especially Rules 1.7(b) and 1.8(a), (b) and (f)], and to scrupulously adhere to the requirements of Rule 1.6 relating to disclosure of confidential information. The promotion of the law-related services must also in all respects comply with Rules 7.1 and 7.3, dealing with advertising and solicitation. In that regard, lawyers should take special care to identify the obligations that may be imposed as a result of a jurisdiction’s decisional law.
[8] When the full protections of all of these Rules do not apply to the provision of law-related services, principles of law external to these Rules, for example, the law of principal and agent, govern the legal duties owed to those receiving the services. Those other legal principles may establish a different degree of protection for the recipient with respect to confidentiality of information, conflicts of interest and permissible business relationships with clients. See also Rule 8.4 (Misconduct).
Modified By:
N.D. Ethics Op. 01-03 (2001) (disclaimer that lawyer’s tax preparation business is unrelated to law practice will not avoid application of ethics rules if business customer is also client); aba
N.D. Ethics Op. 01-03 (2001) (lawyer’s tax preparation business subject to ethics rules if not distinct from his law practice).aba
N.D. Ethics Op. 98-07 (1998) (lawyer who provides both legal and nonlegal services to same person “must take special care to heed” ethics rules relating to conflict of interest and confidentiality); aba
ABA Rule 6.5 (Court annexed/Non-profit limited scope)
RULE 6.5 – NONPROFIT AND COURT-ANNEXED LIMITED LEGAL SERVICES PROGRAMS
…
(c) A client who has been served under the circumstances authorized under paragraph (a) is, for purposes of Rule 1.9, a former client of the lawyer providing the service, but that lawyer’s disqualification is not imputed to lawyers associated with that lawyer for purposes of Rule 1.10
Relevant Comments:
[1] Legal services organizations, courts, and various nonprofit organizations have established programs through which lawyers provide short-term limited legal services —such as advice or the completion of legal forms —that will assist persons to address their legal problems without further representation by a lawyer. In these programs, such as legal-advice hotlines, advice-only clinics or pro se counseling programs, a client-lawyer relationship is established, but there is no expectation that the lawyer’s representation of the client will continue beyond the limited consultation. Such programs are normally operated under circumstances in which it is not feasible for a lawyer to systematically screen for conflicts of interest as is generally required before undertaking a representation. See, e.g., Rules 1.7, 1.9, and 1.10.
[2] A lawyer who provides short-term limited legal services pursuant to this Rule must secure the client’s consent after consultation to the limited scope of the representation. See Rule 1.2(c). If a short-term limited representation would not be reasonable under the circumstances, the lawyer may offer advice to the client but must also advise the client of the need for further assistance of counsel. Except as provided in this Rule, the Rules of Professional Conduct, including Rules 1.6 and 1.9(c), are applicable to the limited representation.
[3] Because a lawyer who is representing a client in the circumstances addressed by this Rule ordinarily is not able to check systematically for conflicts of interest, paragraph (a) requires compliance with Rules 1.7 or 1.9(a) or (b) only if the lawyer knows that the representation presents a conflict of interest for the lawyer, and with Rule 1.10 only if the lawyer knows that another lawyer in the lawyer’s firm is disqualified by Rules 1.7 or 1.9(a) or (b) in the matter.
[4] Because the limited nature of the services significantly reduces the risk of conflicts of interest with other matters being handled by the lawyer’s firm, paragraph (b) provides that Rule 1.10 is inapplicable to a representation governed by this Rule except as provided by paragraph (a)(2). Paragraph (a)(2) requires the participating lawyer to comply with Rule 1.10 when the lawyer knows that the lawyer’s firm is disqualified by Rules 1.7 or 1.9(a) or (b). By virtue of paragraph (b), however, a lawyer’s participation in a short-term limited legal services program will not preclude the lawyer’s firm from undertaking or continuing the representation of a client with interests adverse to a client being represented under the program’s auspices. Nor will the personal disqualification of a lawyer participating in the program be imputed to other lawyers participating in the program.
[5] If, after commencing a short-term limited representation in accordance with this Rule, a lawyer undertakes to represent the client in the matter on an ongoing basis, Rules 1.7, 1.9(a) or (b), and 1.10 become applicable.
ABA Rule 7.2(b) (Lawyer referral)
RULE 7.2 ADVERTISING
…
(c) A lawyer shall not give anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer’s services, except that a lawyer may
(1) pay the reasonable costs of advertisements or communications permitted by this Rule;
(2) pay the usual charges of a not-for-profit lawyer referral service or legal service organization; and
(3) pay for a law practice in accordance with Rule 1.17.
Relevant Comments:
[4] A lawyer is allowed to pay for advertising permitted by this Rule and for the purchase of a law practice in accordance with the provisions of Rule 1.17, but otherwise is not permitted to pay another person for recommending the lawyer’s services or for channeling professional work in a manner that violates Rule 7.3. A communication contains a recommendation if it endorses or vouches for a lawyer’s credentials, abilities, competence, character, or other professional qualities. Moreover, a lawyer may pay others for generating client leads, such as Internet-based client leads, as long as the lead generator does not recommend the lawyer, any payment to the lead generator is consistent with Rules 1.5(e) (division of fees) and 5.4 (professional independence of the lawyer), and the lead generator’s communications are consistent with Rule 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer’s services). To comply with Rule 7.1, a lawyer must not pay a lead generator that states, implies, or creates a reasonable impression that it is recommending the lawyer, is making the referral without payment from the lawyer, or has analyzed a person’s legal problems when determining which lawyer should receive the referral. This restriction does not prevent an organization or person other than the lawyer from advertising or recommending the lawyer’s services. Thus, a legal aid agency or prepaid legal services plan may pay to advertise legal services provided under its auspices. Likewise, a lawyer may participate in not-for-profit lawyer referral programs and pay the usual fees charged by such programs. Paragraph (c) does not prohibit paying regular compensation to an assistant, such as a secretary, to prepare communications permitted by this Rule.
Modified By:
N.D. Ethics Op. 08-06 (2008) (firm may not pay agency to market firm’s estate planning services to employees of particular corporation);
In re Disciplinary Action against McCray, 755 N.W.2d 835 (N.D. 2008) (lawyer paid marketing firm to tout firm’s services at credit repair seminars)
Cloud Computing
No opinions available.
Technology Competency
Comment to Rule 1.1
[5] To maintain the requisite knowledge and skill, a lawyer must keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, including the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology, engage in continuing study and education and comply with all continuing legal education requirements.