Opinion 70-27
FLORIDA BAR ETHICS OPINION OPINION 70-27 August 20, 1970 Advisory ethics opinions are not binding. It is unethical for a lawyer to allow a client to send out form letters under the attorney’s name, but with the client’s return address for collection purposes. Canons: CPR: 29, 35 and 47 EC 3-6 Chairman Massey stated the opinion of the committee: An inquiring attorney has a client who desires to send out form letters under the attorney’s name but with the client’s return address for collection purposes. The sample letters furnished are in a series, each somewhat stronger in language than the previous one. A lawyer should never allow his name to be used in such a described professional connotation by anyone. The proposed conduct would be degrading to and an unwarranted commercialization of the legal profession. The Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon 3, EC 3-6, illustrates this conclusion wherein, although acknowledging and allowing delegation of tasks to lay personnel, it contemplates delegation as proper only when the lawyer maintains direct relationship with his client, supervises the delegated work, and has complete professional responsibility for the work product.