Panel: attorney referral services and medical providers should not mix.

Lawyers should not be able to join referral services that also refer callers for medical help or other non-legal professional services, according to the Special Committee on Lawyer Referral Services.

The committee voted unanimously to make that recommendation at its May 4 meeting, as it begins to put the finishing touches on a report that could go to the Bar Board of Governors in July. The committee is scheduled to meet again to possibly approve a final report during the Bar's Annual Convention later this month.

The panel also voted to retain the requirement that lawyer referral services register with the Bar, but include restrictions that services should not claim such registration means they are "Bar approved."

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The committee acted on the prohibition from joining a service that also does other professional referrals after getting an opinion from outside counsel Barry Richard that it would not violate the U.S. Constitution or restraint of trade laws.

If ultimately approved in rule form by the Bar Board of Governors and the Supreme Court, the committee's action would mean, "A lawyer cannot accept a referral from any entity which also refers to other professionals for the same event," said committee Chair Grier Wells.

"If you take, for example, an automobile accident, a lawyer cannot accept a referral for that automobile accident if the referral source also refers [the caller] to other professional activities, such as a chiropractor or urologist or whatever," he added. "You can be involved in a referral service if the service is truly a lawyer referral service."

Committee members reiterated their earlier concerns about potential conflicts when a lawyer represents a client who has also been referred to medical treatment at a facility in which the referral service has a financial interest. That's because when lawyers settle such a personal injury case, they are also expected to negotiate medical liens and bills incurred by their clients. In these cases, those charges would be owed to the entity that sent the lawyer the case and from which the lawyer would presumably hope to get more referrals.

During the committee discussion, member Alvin Alsobrook--a public member of the Board of Governors--asked attorney Tim Chinaris--who was present representing the medical/legal referral service 411-PAIN--what such a restriction would mean to his client.

"It's hard to say," Chinaris replied. "I think what would happen is the service...