Ohio Board Advisory Opinion Op 89-012

The Supreme Court of Ohio
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES AND DISCIPLINE
41 SOUTH HIGH STREET-SUITE 3370, COLUMBUS, OH 43215-6105
(614) 644-5800 FAX: (614) 644-5804
OFFICE OF SECRETARY
OPINION 89-12
Issued April 14, 1989
[CPR Opinion-provides advice under the Ohio Code of Professional Responsibility which is superseded by the Ohio
Rules of Professional Conduct, eff. 2/1/2007.]
SYLLABUS: A lawyer may not limit his or her liability when rendering title opinions based on
abstracting services done by individuals who are not lawyers.
OPINION: We have before us your request that we prepare an opinion as to whether it is ethically
possible to limit a lawyer's liability when he or she prepares title opinions based on abstracting
services done by individuals who are not lawyers. There are legal issues associated with your
request that we are not authorized to address.
With regard to the ethical matters in your request, DR 6-102 provides that lawyers may not attempt
to exonerate themselves from or limit their liability to their clients for their personal malpractice.
Lawyers may not limit their liability to clients even when there appear to be special circumstances,
such as the use of abstracting services for the preparation of title opinions. Any exception to the
absolute prohibition under DR 6-102 would have to be established by the Ohio Supreme Court or
other court of law and not by this Board in the form of an advisory opinion.
The argument has been made with regard to limiting lawyers' liability in the issuance of real estate
opinions that a lawyer who conducts his clients' affairs properly need not attempt to limit his
liability. Maine Opinion No. 80-26 (1980), Code of Professional Responsibility EC 6-6. This
argument is in keeping with the intent of DR 6-102. It is our opinion that a lawyer's liability may
not be limited even when the services of an outside agency are involved.
In conclusion, it is our opinion and you are so advised that an attorney may not limit his liability
when rendering title opinions based on abstracting services done by individuals who are not
lawyers.
This is an informal, non-binding advisory opinion based upon the facts presented and limited
to questions arising under the Code of Professional Responsibility.