Link to original WordPerfect Document

                                         95 N.J.L.J. 973
                                        September 21, 1972

ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL ETHICS

Appointed by the New Jersey Supreme Court


OPINION 242

Professional Announcement - Legal Service

    A New Jersey attorney asks if he may properly advertise in the New Jersey Law Journal or other papers offering his services in tracing heirs in connection with the clearance of land titles.
    It is our opinion that such advertisement directed to the general public would clearly be improper (DR 2-101 and 2-105). Hence, such advertising may not be placed in "other papers" or otherwise directed to the public. The inquiry, however, may be construed also to inquire as to whether a professional announcement on this subject may be directed to other lawyers through insertion in the New Jersey Law Journal. It is our opinion that it may, so long as the announcement follows the mandate of DR 2-105,(A) 3 which reads as follows:
        A lawyer available to act as a consultant to or as an associate of other lawyers in a particular branch of law or legal service may distribute to other lawyers and publish in legal journals a dignified announcement of such availability, but the announcement shall not contain a representation of special competence or experience. The announcement shall not be distributed to lawyers more frequently than once in a calendar year, but it may be published periodically in legal journal.

    The tracing of heirs in connection with the clearance of land titles would appear to be "legal service" within the meaning of that disciplinary rule as to which the inquirer may properly offer
his services only to other attorneys ac a consultant or associate. Our prior Opinions 107 and 108, 90 N.J.L.J. 245 (1967) which limited such announcements to "specialized legal services" as there interpreted were governed by former Canons of Professional Ethics, Canon 46 without the amendments to that Canon adopted by the American Bar Association in 1946. Unlike those amendments, DR 2-105(A) 3 has now been adopted in New Jersey and in our opinion governs this aspect of the inquiry.

* * *

This archive is a service of Rutgers University School of Law - Camden