Informal Opinion Number: 980137
Reference Note: Effective July 1, 2007, Rule 4 dash–1.6 was amended and new comments adopted. This informal opinion should be read with Comment [16] to the amended Rule.
QUESTION: Attorney is requesting clarification of 970230 concerning communicating with a client using e-mail. Attorney feels that the previous opinion is an overreaction. Would OCDC reconsider its position?
ANSWER: The recency of the development of e-mail communication is a valid basis for a distinction between forms of communication. It is certainly acceptable to advise clients of the relative risks of interception of communications by regular telephones, etc. However, the attorney owes a duty to the client to advise of the risks of attorney/client communications through a technology about which many clients only have a rudimentary knowledge. This advice does not have to be technical in nature. The advice must be adequate to inform the client of the nature of the risk before the client makes the decision that it is acceptable to use that method of communication.
Request an Informal Opinion.
© Copyright 2026