Formal Opinion 127—Use of Social Media for Investigative Purposes, Adopted September 2015, 1115 COBJ, 2015, November, Pg. 21
In and Around the Bar CBA Ethics Committee
Formal Opinion 127—Use of Social Media for Investigative Purposes, Adopted September 2015
Introduction
As various forms of social media have become commonplace, lawyers increasingly utilize social media and social networks as investigative tools. Various social media such as Facebook, Twitter, Linkedln, and YouTube are potential treasure troves of information concerning opposing parties, witnesses, jurors, opposing counsel, and judges. Use of social media to obtain information in the course of representing clients implicates a number of ethical issues. In many respects, the ethical issues involved in conducting investigations through social media are neither novel nor unique. The Colorado Bar Association Ethics Committee (Committee) recognizes, however, that various jurisdictions and bar associations have expressed differing views about the application of established ethical principles to some aspects of the rapidly-evolving world of investigation through social media. As social media continue to change, and new forms of social media are developed, lawyers should seek guidance from the principles discussed in this opinion and the provisions of the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct (Colo. RPC or the Rules) referenced herein.
This opinion addresses ethical issues that arise when lawyers, either directly or indirectly, use social media to obtain information regarding witnesses, jurors, opposing parties, opposing counsel, and judges. The opinion also addresses circumstances in which lawyers seek to access restricted portions of a person's social media profile or website that ordinarily may be viewed only by permission.
This opinion does not address a lawyer's use of social media for marketing or for disseminating information. This opinion also does not address the extent to which lawyers may have to become familiar with or utilize social media to comply with the applicable standard of care or the ethical obligation to provide competent representation to clients.
Syllabus
A lawyer may always view the public portion of a person's social media profile and any public posts made by a person through social media. A lawyer acting on behalf of a client may request permission to view a restricted portion of a social media profile or website of an unrepresented party or unrepresented witness only after the lawyer identifies himself or herself as a lawyer, and discloses the general nature of the matter in which the lawyer represents the client. A lawyer acting on behalf of a client may not request permission to view a restricted portion of a social media profile or website of a person the lawyer knows to be represented by counsel in that same matter, without obtaining consent from that counsel. When requesting or obtaining information from a third person who has access to restricted portions of a social media profile or website of a party or witness, a lawyer is subject to the same standards as when requesting any other information in the hands of a third person. A lawyer may not request permission to view a restricted portion of a social media profile or website of a judge while the judge is presiding over a case in which the lawyer is involved as counsel or as a party, nor may a lawyer seek to communicate ex parte with a judge through social media concerning a matter or issue pending before the judge. A lawyer may not request permission to view a restricted portion of a social media profile or website of a prospective or sitting juror. A lawyer must never use any form of deception to gain access to a restricted portion of a social media profile or website. Finally, a lawyer may not avoid prohibitions relating to the use of social media for investigative purposes by delegating investigative tasks to others.
Analysis
The Internet has become indispensable for lawyers in the twenty-first century for, among other things, marketing, conducting investigations and legal research, and obtaining general information in connection with the practice of law. Social media are among the many tools available to lawyers for these purposes. Social networks have been defined as follows:
[I]nternet-based communities that individuals use to communicate with each other and view and exchange information, including photographs, digital recordings, and files. Users create a profile page with personal information that other users may access online. Users may establish the level of privacy they wish to employ and may limit those who view their profile page to "friends"—those who have specifically sent a computerized request to view their profile page which the user has accepted.[1]
The capabilities, features and security measures available to users of social media are in a constant state of flux. As social media and social networks evolve, ethical issues undoubtedly will arise that will have to be analyzed on a case-by-case basis. Lawyers utilizing social media in the practice of law should stay reasonably informed of these changes and how they may impact their ethical obligations.2
I. Accessing the Public Portion of a Person's Social Media Profile and Public Posts Made by a Person in Social Media
Individuals cannot control all of the information, observations, or opinions posted about them on the Internet, including through social media. To the extent they decide to establish their own social media presence, however, individuals generally have some degree of control over the information included. Depending upon the type of social media utilized and the privacy settings available, individuals may exercise some control over the people, or class of people, to whom certain information is available. Some information posted by a person through social media is available to anyone, or almost anyone, who has Internet access. Other information is accessible only to those granted specific permission by the individual who created the profile.
For purposes of this opinion, the public portion of a person's social media profile or webpage refers to the information posted by an individual through some form of social media that is available to and viewable by anyone with access to the Internet or at least by anyone who subscribes to, or is a member of, the larger social network through which the information is posted. For purposes of this opinion, the restricted portion of a person's social media profile or website refers to information or portions of the profile accessible to and viewable by only those receiving specific permission from the person who established the profile or posted the information.
Bar association ethics committees that have addressed this issue generally agree that lawyers may view any information publicly posted by a witness, or included on the public portion of that person's social media profile.3 Such information is treated no differently from any other publicly available information or public record. The Committee believes that the same rule applies to the public portion of a social media profile or posting established by any other individual, including an opposing party, opposing counsel, a judge before whom the lawyer is appearing, or a juror. The Committee concludes that simply viewing the public portion of a person's social media profile or any public posting made by an individual does not constitute a "communication" with that person. Therefore, the lawyer's conduct in viewing such material does not implicate any of the restrictions upon communications between a lawyer and certain others involved in the legal system. Similarly, a lawyer may iew or utilize information to which the lawyer already has access through the lawyer's social media connections.
Several provisions of the Rules prohibit or limit communications between a lawyer and various types of individuals involved in the legal system. Colo. RPC 3.5(b) prohibits ex parte communications between a lawyer and a judge, juror, prospective juror, or other official by means prohibited by law. Colo. RPC 4.2 prohibits a lawyer who represents a client from communicating about the subject matter of the representation with a person the lawyer knows to be represented by another lawyer in the same matter, unless the lawyer has the consent of the other lawyer or is authorized to do so by law or a court order. Colo. RPC 4.3 restricts communications between a lawyer who represents a client and a person who is not represented by counsel. The Committee believes that these rules are not implicated when a lawyer reviews or attempts to review the public portion of social media profiles of any of the classes of persons identified in Rules 3.5, 4.2, and 4.3, because the lawyer's actions in such circumstances do not constitute a form of communication with the individual.
In expressing this opinion, the Committee realizes that some social media networks automatically notify a person when someone views his or her profile. In these circumstances, the person whose profile is viewed may also receive information concerning the individual who viewed the profile. Some bar association committees have opined that it is proper for a lawyer to view a juror's social media profile only so long as the juror remains unaware that such investigation is occurring.4...
To continue reading
Request your trial