At a Glance

Maryland lawyer marketing involves both professional-conduct rules and statutes directed at particular solicitations. The statutory distinction matters: a general website is different from a message sent to someone because of a specific accident or prosecution.

Rules 19-307.1 through 19-307.5, in effect since July 1, 2016, cover truthful communications, advertising, direct contact, practice descriptions and firm names. Only Rule 19-307.4 has been amended since then (effective April 1, 2017); the rule text linked from the Judiciary’s attorney rules index is current with amendments received through September 1, 2026.

Maryland’s Legislature separately imposes timing, labeling and filing requirements on defined targeted communications. Those provisions do not create a blanket filing requirement for every law-firm webpage.

Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5; Maryland Courts: attorney rules index

Read source: Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312. · Maryland Courts: attorney rules index.

Who Regulates

The Supreme Court of Maryland’s attorney rules provide the professional-conduct framework. The Attorney Grievance Commission and Office of Bar Counsel administer the disciplinary system. Maryland’s court-maintained rules index links to the rule text.

The Maryland General Assembly’s Business Occupations and Professions Article adds statutory obligations. A campaign may need to satisfy both the professional rules and the statutes; following one does not excuse ignoring the other.

Sources: Maryland Courts: attorney rules index; Maryland General Assembly: Business Occupations and Professions §10-605.2

Read source: Maryland Courts: attorney rules index. · Maryland General Assembly: Business Occupations and Professions §10-605.2.

What Counts as Advertising

Rule 19-307.1 reaches all communications about a lawyer’s services. Rule 19-307.2 permits public-media advertising and communications not involving in-person contact, subject to the truthfulness and solicitation rules. A marketing claim does not become exempt simply because it appears in a social profile instead of a paid advertisement.

That text permits information such as practice areas, fee arrangements, language abilities and contact details. It also makes each participating attorney responsible for compliance, including participation in group advertising or referral programs. Purchasing marketing services does not transfer the lawyer’s professional responsibility to the agency. Rule 19-307.2(c) prohibits giving value for recommendations except reasonable permitted advertising or written-communication costs, usual charges of a legal-service plan or not-for-profit attorney referral service, a practice purchase under Rule 19-301.17, and an otherwise permitted nonexclusive reciprocal arrangement with a non-attorney professional disclosed to the client. The referral-service exception does not authorize paying a for-profit service to recommend the attorney.

Source: 2016 court compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.2 and comments, pp. 297–303; Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312

Read source: Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312.

Required Disclosures

Rule 19-307.2(d) requires the name of at least one attorney responsible for an advertising communication. A statement that no fee will be charged without a recovery must also disclose whether the client remains liable for expenses.

Rule 19-307.3(c) requires “Advertising Material” on the outside envelope, if any, and at the beginning and end of recorded or electronic solicitations directed to someone known to need legal services in a particular matter, subject to the stated relationship exceptions.

A separate statutory label applies to communications within Business Occupations and Professions §10-605.2. That section requires “this is an advertisement” prominently at the beginning and end, with additional envelope/address-panel and format requirements. Video wording must appear for at least five seconds at each end; audio delivery must be substantially equivalent in quality to the rest of the recording.

The statute also prohibits presenting a written communication as, or including, legal pleadings or legal documents, and prohibits revealing the nature of the prospective client’s matter on the outside of an envelope or self-mailer. Do not assume one generic footer satisfies all of these requirements.

Sources: 2016 court compilation, pp. 299–305; §10-605.2(d)–(g); Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312; Maryland General Assembly: Business Occupations and Professions §10-605.2

Read source: Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312. · Maryland General Assembly: Business Occupations and Professions §10-605.2.

Filing, Review & Recordkeeping

Rule 19-307.2(b) calls for a copy or recording of an advertisement and a record of when and where it was used for at least three years after its last dissemination. Comment 10 explains that substantiating compliance may require keeping records longer. Comment 6 distinguishes recordkeeping from advance advertising review.

Section 10-605.2 creates a separate filing obligation for communications within its defined scope. Within three days after sending, the sender must file the communication, a sample envelope if used, and the recipient’s applicable contact information with Bar Counsel. Identical communications sent to multiple recipients may be filed as one copy with the recipient list. Periodic identical sends to additional recipients require additional lists at least monthly.

This targeted filing rule applies to the specified accident, personal-injury, wrongful-death, criminal-prosecution and incarcerable-traffic matters. It excludes unrelated general direct marketing and communications requested by the prospective client. Filing is not government approval, and the statute prohibits suggesting otherwise.

Sources: 2016 court compilation, Rule 19-307.2(b), comments 6 and 10; §10-605.2(a), (b), (h); Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312; Maryland General Assembly: Business Occupations and Professions §10-605.2

Read source: Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312. · Maryland General Assembly: Business Occupations and Professions §10-605.2.

Results, Testimonials & Comparisons

Rule 19-307.1 prohibits material misrepresentations, misleading omissions, unjustified expectations and comparisons that cannot be factually substantiated.

Comment [1] explains that the prohibition on unjustified expectations would ordinarily preclude advertisements about client results, including damage awards and a record of favorable verdicts, and advertisements containing client endorsements. A disclaimer is not automatic permission to use those claims. Comment [2] imposes additional minimum safeguards. A communication describing a record of favorable awards, verdicts, judgments or settlements must expressly and conspicuously explain that each case is different and past success does not assure a favorable future outcome. A testimonial from someone who was not a genuine pre-existing client and did not actually benefit from the lawyer’s services is treated as misleading.

A results disclaimer does not justify an inaccurate award amount, an invented client endorsement or an unsupported superiority claim. As a practical editorial measure, keep the factual support for each claim with the approved copy and review the complete presentation rather than the disclaimer alone.

Source: 2016 court compilation, Rule 19-307.1 and comments 1–2, pp. 297–298; Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312

Read source: Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312.

Specialization & Certification

The Court’s December 13, 2016 order amended Rule 19-307.4 effective April 1, 2017 by deleting the blanket prohibition on publicly holding oneself out as a specialist. Practice-field communications remain subject to Rule 19-307.1’s prohibition on false or misleading claims. The amended text also permits a lawyer admitted to patent practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office to use “Patent Attorney” or a substantially similar designation.

Do not repeat the superseded blanket specialty ban. Equally, a specialty or certification label must accurately describe the lawyer’s qualifications and must not mislead. A directory category, badge or professional organization’s terminology does not remove the need to substantiate the claim.

Source: Court’s December 13, 2016 rules order, pp. 2–3 and 241–242; amendment effective April 1, 2017; Maryland Rules Order, 191st Report; Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312

Read source: Maryland Rules Order, 191st Report · Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312.

Firm, Trade & Domain Names

Rule 19-307.5(a) permits trade names only when they are not misleading and do not imply a connection with a government agency or a public or charitable legal-services organization. Its comments give particularly detailed cautions about government-unit names and language suggesting public funding.

A multijurisdictional firm may use the same name, but the text requires identification of licensing limitations for lawyers not admitted where the office is located. It also limits use of a public-office holder’s name when that lawyer is not actively and regularly practicing with the firm, and prohibits implying a partnership or organization that does not exist.

For domains and online profiles, review the impression created by the name, office listings and attorney biographies together. A city keyword in a domain should not be treated as automatically approved merely because it is useful for search.

Source: 2016 court compilation, Rule 19-307.5 and comments, pp. 310–312; Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312

Read source: Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312.

Solicitation & Direct Contact

Rule 19-307.3(a) prohibits in-person, live telephone and real-time electronic solicitation when a significant motive is the attorney’s pecuniary gain, except for contact with another attorney or a person with a family, close personal or prior professional relationship. Even otherwise permitted solicitation is prohibited when the recipient cannot exercise reasonable judgment because of their physical, emotional or mental state, has asked not to be solicited, or the approach involves coercion, duress or harassment.

The rule includes a limited prepaid/group legal-plan provision. It should not be read as permission for a law firm to create its own controlled organization to solicit particular legal matters.

Maryland’s separate §10-605.1 prohibits covered communications seeking employment in personal-injury, wrongful-death, accident or disaster matters involving the recipient or their relative unless the accident or disaster occurred more than 30 days before sending. The statute lists covered communication forms, including online transmissions, written communications and recordings. A prospective client’s requested communication is excepted.

Section 10-605.2 adds the targeted labeling and filing requirements discussed above, including certain criminal and incarcerable-traffic prosecutions. Its scope is different from the accident-related timing statute; the two should not be collapsed into a single universal 30-day advertising rule.

Sources: 2016 court compilation, Rule 19-307.3, pp. 304–308; Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312; Maryland General Assembly: Business Occupations and Professions §10-605.1; Maryland General Assembly: Business Occupations and Professions §10-605.2

Read source: Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312. · Maryland General Assembly: Business Occupations and Professions §10-605.1. · Maryland General Assembly: Business Occupations and Professions §10-605.2.

Channel-Specific Notes

Website and search copy: distinguish genuine practice descriptions from specialist claims, substantiate comparisons, and make responsibility and fee-expense disclosures part of the actual communication where required.

Social profiles and video: assess testimonials, results and descriptions as communications about legal services. Short formats do not make misleading claims acceptable. Where §10-605.2 applies, its video and audio labeling specifications matter.

Direct messages and live chat: assess how the contact occurs, who initiated it and whether it is real-time solicitation. A public educational post and an individualized live pitch to someone with a known legal problem require different analysis.

Mail and targeted campaigns: classify the recipient and event before production. Check timing, labels, envelope privacy, filing materials and recipient lists together.

Referral and lead-generation services: distinguish permitted advertising costs from payment for recommendations. Rule 19-307.2(c)’s referral-service exception is limited to not-for-profit services; a marketing contract does not create an exception for paid recommendations.

These are practical applications of the cited communication rules and targeted-communication statutes, not separate platform-specific exemptions.

Sources: 2016 court compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5; §§10-605.1–10-605.2; Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312; Maryland General Assembly: Business Occupations and Professions §10-605.2

Read source: Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312. · Maryland General Assembly: Business Occupations and Professions §10-605.2.

Recent Changes & Scope

Advertising decisions should use the operative rule text, applicable statutes and relevant interpretations at the time of the campaign. A proposed rules report does not itself amend a rule, and an ethics committee opinion should not be presented as a binding court decision.

The Maryland Courts rules index and rules-order page provide starting points for checking the governing text and subsequent orders. The rule text linked from the index, current with amendments received through September 1, 2026, shows no amendment to Rules 19-307.1 through 19-307.5 after April 1, 2017, and the rules-order page lists no order after June 4, 2026. The pending 229th Report (open meeting January 5, 2027) proposes artificial-intelligence and technology amendments to Rules 19-301.1, 19-301.6, 19-303.3 and 19-305.3, not to the advertising rules.

Maryland Courts: attorney rules index; Maryland Courts: proposed changes and rules orders

Read source: Maryland Courts: attorney rules index. · Maryland Courts: proposed changes and rules orders.

Official Sources

Read the official rules alongside other applicable law and obtain campaign-specific advice.

1. Maryland Courts: attorney rules index.Official source · Checked November 12, 2026
2. Maryland Courts: 2016 Title 19 compilation, Rules 19-307.1–19-307.5, pp. 297–312.Official source · Checked November 12, 2026
3. Maryland General Assembly: Business Occupations and Professions §10-605.1.Official source · Checked November 12, 2026
4. Maryland General Assembly: Business Occupations and Professions §10-605.2.Official source · Checked November 12, 2026
5. Maryland Courts: proposed changes and rules orders.Official source · Checked November 12, 2026