Opinion ID: 1231365
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Solicitation Letters

Text: On February 8, 2005, respondent sent a solicitation letter (Letter # 1) to residents in and around Graniteville, in which respondent referred to himself as a neighborhood attorney and included his photograph. Letter # 1 stated his staff will review your claim to see if you are entitled to damages and stated he was able to achieve the best legal results possible. Respondent failed to disclose that he principally practiced law in Louisiana, did not disclose how he obtained the information prompting the communication, included a form of the word expert, and provided an incorrect address and telephone number for the Commission on Lawyer Conduct (the Commission). Respondent did not file a copy of Letter # 1 with the Commission and did not pay the required filing fee within ten days of mailing the letter. On February 18, 2005, respondent sent another solicitation letter (Letter # 2) to residents in and around Graniteville. Letter # 2 was similar, but not identical to Letter # 1, in that respondent removed his photograph and the word expertise. Although respondent filed a copy of Letter # 2 with the Commission, he failed to provide a list of persons to whom the letter was sent. On March 3, 2005, respondent sent a third solicitation letter (Letter # 3) to residents in and around Graniteville, in which he used the phrase experts in law. Respondent failed to file a copy with the Commission, pay the filing fee, or provide a list of persons to whom it was sent within ten days of mailing Letter # 3. On March 22, 2005, respondent attempted to file Letter # 3 with the Commission, but failed to include a list of persons to whom it was mailed. By letter dated March 7, 2005, ODC notified respondent of a complaint filed against him as a result of the solicitation letters and requested a response within fifteen days. Respondent failed to respond. [2]