Legislation Concerning the Practice of Law
The Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel generally focuses on lawyers’ and licensed legal paraprofessionals’ compliance with their respective Rules of Professional Conduct, which are approved by the Colorado Supreme Court. However, we remind practitioners that the Colorado legislature has recently enacted statutes that also impact the practice of law.
In our May 2026 newsletter, we discussed two new statutes concerning the legal profession and directly affecting private practice lawyers. Both bills have now been signed into law. The first bill addresses lead generation marketing for legal services. SB26-174 It creates obligations for lawyers that are somewhat different than those under Colo. RPC 7.2, Comment 5. The second bill addresses fee-sharing with nonlawyers/non-LLPs, and sets forth provisions that go beyond Colo. RPC 5.4. HB26-1421 Both bills are scheduled to take effect on August 12, 2026.
In May’s newsletter, we also reminded practitioners of HB25-1090, the fee agreement bill that was enacted last year and took effect in January of this year, and we discussed the relationship between statutes and the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct.
ABA Formal Opinion 524
On July 22, 2026, the ABA Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility issued ABA Formal Ethics Opinion 524 Government Lawyers’ Obligations When Knowing of a Public Official’s Intended or Ongoing Violation of Law. The Opinion examines the obligations set forth in Model Rules 1.13(b) and (c) which address a lawyer’s professional responsibilities when a lawyer for an organization knows someone within the organization is acting in a way that violates the law, the conduct will be imputed to the organization, and the conduct is likely to result in substantial injury to the organization. The Opinion considers the provisions of the rule, including “up-the-ladder reporting”, specifically in relation to government lawyers. The Opinion explains government lawyers should first consider whether they are acting in a representational capacity, and if so, identify the client. The Opinion then closely examines the aspects of the rule that require interpretation. With respect to whether conduct would be “imputed to the organization” the Opinion explains the conduct would be imputed if the government representative “is using or misusing authority they possess by virtue of their position with the government”. P. 7. With respect to “substantial injury”, the Opinion explains government lawyers are uniquely placed in this assessment given the “public interest in the integrity of the government” and government lawyers’ special obligations to “maintain trust in public government”, such that the focus for this assessment should be whether a higher authority within the organization or outside the organization “should reasonably want to know the information and reasonably be expected to act on it to protect the organization from being injured by the wrongdoing.” P. 9. The Opinion recognizes that like all lawyers, government lawyers have discretion in how to proceed in the best interest of the organization, including taking the matter to the highest authority in the organization, and, outside the organization, consistent with Rule 1.13(c), but only if and to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary to prevent substantial injury to the organization. P. 10. Finally, the Opinion notes that government lawyers may have other disclosure obligations beyond Model Rule 1.13.
BEWARE IDENTITY THEFT
We periodically remind legal practitioners to stay attuned to identity theft. Our office has recently fielded calls from individuals reporting they believed they had hired a lawyer, only to find a bad actor had utilized the lawyer’s identity and was now asking the caller to make payment to the person pretending to be the licensed lawyer. It appears that practitioners who do not have a registered business address with the Office of Attorney Registration are more vulnerable to these scams, likely because prospective clients do not have a way to contact the lawyer or verify contact information for the lawyer. The prospective client is likely left relying on the contact information the bad actor provided. If you do not currently have a registered business address or telephone number with the Office of Attorney Registration, you may wish to consider providing this information. A registered business/office name, mailing address and telephone number would appear on our website with your individual name and attorney registration number. Pursuant to C.R.C.P. 227, your designated “home” address and email address will not be made publicly available by our office, even if you use that email address for e-filing in the state court system. You may check how your current registration information appears on our website. To update your registration information, you may contact the Office of Attorney Registration. For information about identify theft and what to do if your identity is stolen, visit Identity Theft | Stop Fraud Colorado
COMPARISON AND OUR MENTAL HEALTH
“Compare and despair” is a common refrain in today’s world, especially given the ease with which social media enables comparison. But is comparison always bad? Might it serve to motivate us positively? Maggie Kapitan, Clinical Coordinator at the Colorado Lawyer Assistance Program, explores why we compare, whether it’s helpful or hurtful, and how intentionality factors into the analysis. Social Comparisons: Motivations and Pitfalls
