By Neta, founder of SortMyDivorce · Updated
A letter arrives from your spouse's lawyer, addressed to you. Whether that is normal, a mistake, or a breach of the lawyer's professional rules depends on one fact: whether you have a lawyer of your own in the matter. This guide covers both situations, quotes the rules that govern each, and says what to do with the letter in either case. This guide is about lawyers' conduct rules, which are provincial in Canada and state-by-state in the United States. The Canadian rules quoted are from the Federation of Law Societies' Model Code, which every provincial law society has adopted in its own version. The United States comparison is California's Rule 4.2, which follows the American Bar Association's model. Your own law society's or state bar's wording governs. The separate guide on correspondence that comes directly from your spouse, rather than their lawyer, covers a different situation.
| If you have a lawyer | Model Code rule 7.2-6: another lawyer "must not, except through or with the consent of the person's lawyer," approach, communicate or deal with you on the matter, or "attempt to negotiate or compromise the matter directly." |
|---|---|
| The condition | The rule applies where the other lawyer "knows that the person is represented in the matter," and knowledge "may be inferred from the circumstances." |
| Limited-scope retainers | Rule 7.2-6A: if your lawyer acts only on part of the matter, the other lawyer may contact you directly on the rest, unless given written notice of the scope. |
| If you do not have a lawyer | Rule 7.2-9: the lawyer must "urge the unrepresented person to obtain independent legal representation," make sure you do not think your interests are being protected by them, and "make it clear" they act "exclusively in the interests of the client." |
| Spouses may still talk to each other | Commentary to 7.2-6: the rule "does not prevent parties to a matter from communicating directly with each other." |
| California | Rule 4.2(a): a lawyer "shall not communicate directly or indirectly about the subject of" the representation with a represented person without their lawyer's consent. The comments say the same about parties talking to each other. |
| What to do, represented | Do not reply. Forward the letter to your lawyer the same day, and tell the sender in writing who your lawyer is. |
| What to do, unrepresented | Reply in writing, on the substance only, knowing the writer acts for your spouse and not for you. |
Keeping track of dates like these across a stack of letters is exactly what SortMyDivorce does — start a free trial, no card needed.
The Canadian rule is short. Model Code rule 7.2-6: "Subject to rules 7.2-6A and 7.2-7, if a person is represented by a lawyer in respect of a matter, another lawyer must not, except through or with the consent of the person's lawyer: (a) approach, communicate or deal with the person on the matter; or (b) attempt to negotiate or compromise the matter directly with the person."
The commentary explains its reach. Paragraph [1]: the rule "applies to communications with any person, whether or not a party to a formal adjudicative proceeding, contract or negotiation, who is represented by a lawyer concerning the matter to which the communication relates." So it is not limited to court cases. A lawyer negotiating a separation agreement with your lawyer is bound by it just as much as a lawyer in litigation.
Paragraph [2] sets the condition: "The prohibition on communications with a represented person applies only where the lawyer knows that the person is represented in the matter to be discussed. This means that the lawyer has actual knowledge of the fact of the representation, but actual knowledge may be inferred from the circumstances. This inference may arise when there is substantial reason to believe that the person with whom communication is sought is represented in the matter to be discussed."
A direct letter from the other side's lawyer, when they know you are represented, is a breach of their rules. Not a grey area. The rule says "must not."
The rule turns on knowledge, so the first thing to do is remove any doubt about it. If there is any chance the other lawyer does not know you have retained someone, a one-line letter fixes that, and after it the inference in paragraph [2] is no longer needed.
There is one important carve-out. Rule 7.2-6A: "Where a person is represented by a lawyer under a limited scope retainer on a matter, another lawyer may, without the consent of the lawyer providing the limited scope legal services, approach, communicate or deal with the person directly on the matter unless the lawyer has been given written notice of the nature of the legal services being provided under the limited scope retainer and the approach, communication or dealing falls within the scope of that retainer." If your lawyer is helping you with one piece of the case only, the other side may write to you directly about the rest, unless they have been told in writing what your lawyer's scope is. If you are on a limited-scope retainer, make sure that notice has been given.
California's Rule 4.2(a) opens: "In representing a client, a lawyer shall not communicate directly or indirectly about the subject of" the representation with a person the lawyer knows to be represented, absent consent. The comments to the rule track the Canadian ones closely. Comment [3]: the prohibition against communicating "indirectly" "is intended to address situations where a lawyer seeks to communicate with a represented person through an intermediary such as an agent, investigator or the lawyer's client. This rule, however, does not prevent represented persons from communicating directly with one another with respect to the subject of the representation, nor does it prohibit a lawyer from advising a client concerning such a communication."
Comment [4] mirrors the limited-scope carve-out: "a lawyer who knows that a person is being provided with limited scope representation is not prohibited from communicating with that person with respect to matters that are outside the scope of the limited representation."
Every state has its own Rule 4.2. The wording differs; the principle, that a lawyer does not go around another lawyer to the client, does not.
One consequence of the "indirectly" language surprises people. Your spouse's lawyer may not write to you. Your spouse may. Model Code commentary [1] to rule 7.2-6: "This rule does not prevent parties to a matter from communicating directly with each other." California's comment [3] says the same and adds that a lawyer may advise a client "not to accept or engage in such communications."
So an email from your spouse setting out a proposal is not a breach of anything, even if it was clearly drafted with help. What the rule prohibits is the lawyer using the client as a conduit to get around your lawyer, and that is a hard thing to prove. The practical answer is the one in the guide on correspondence that comes directly to you: read it for what it contains, forward it to your lawyer, and do not negotiate by return.
If you are representing yourself, the other side's lawyer may communicate with you directly. There is no one else for them to write to. But the Model Code attaches obligations to that contact. Rule 7.2-9: "When a lawyer deals on a client's behalf with an unrepresented person, the lawyer must: (a) urge the unrepresented person to obtain independent legal representation; (b) take care to see that the unrepresented person is not proceeding under the impression that his or her interests will be protected by the lawyer; and (c) make it clear to the unrepresented person that the lawyer is acting exclusively in the interests of the client."
That is why letters to self-represented people so often open with a paragraph recommending that you get a lawyer and stating that the writer acts only for your spouse. It is not politeness; it is rule 7.2-9(a) and (c). Read it as the warning it is.
What the rule does not do is make the lawyer neutral. Paragraph (b) is about your impression, not their conduct: they must take care that you do not think they are protecting you. They are not. Every sentence in their letter is written for your spouse's benefit, and a proposal that is described as "fair" or "standard" is their client's proposal.
Do not reply. Anything you write goes straight into the other side's file, and the reason you have a lawyer is so that what goes into that file is considered.
Forward it to your lawyer the same day, with the envelope or the email header. The date it arrived matters if it contains a deadline.
Tell the sender, in one line and in writing, who your lawyer is: "I am represented by [name] at [firm] in this matter. Please direct all correspondence to them." Your lawyer can send it; you can send it yourself. After that letter, the knowledge condition in rule 7.2-6 is met beyond argument.
If it happens again, tell your lawyer and let them decide whether it is a complaint to the law society or a line in the next letter. It is not something for you to argue about directly with the other lawyer.
If you do not have a lawyer.
Reply in writing, and only in writing. A phone call leaves no record of what was said and puts you in a conversation with someone who does this professionally.
Answer the substance and nothing else. If the letter asks for documents, say what you will provide and when. If it makes a proposal, say whether you accept, reject or want to consider it, and by when. Do not explain your feelings, your spouse's conduct or your history; none of it helps and all of it can be quoted back.
Note every deadline in the letter and where it comes from. The guide to deadlines hidden inside lawyer letters covers how to tell a real deadline from an invented one.
Take rule 7.2-9(a) seriously. Being urged to get a lawyer is not a formality. Even a limited-scope retainer, for the one letter that matters most, changes what the other side may do and how they write to you.
Verification note. Only the opening words of California Rule 4.2(a) were legible in the copy read for this page; the rest of that paragraph is summarised, not quoted. California Rule 4.3, on unrepresented persons, was not read and is referred to by name only. The Model Code is the national model; the Law Society of Ontario's and other provincial versions carry the same rule numbers but may differ in wording, and neither could be read from the law societies' own sites in this pass.
Not under rule 7.2-6, if they know you are represented in the matter. Forward it to your lawyer and confirm your representation to the sender in writing. Whether it becomes a complaint is your lawyer's call.
Copying you on correspondence addressed to your lawyer is not the same as dealing with you directly, and practice varies. If it makes you uncomfortable, ask your lawyer to request that correspondence go to them alone.
Under rule 7.2-6A, yes, unless the other lawyer has been given written notice of the nature of your lawyer's limited-scope services and the communication falls within that scope. Ask your lawyer to send that notice if it has not gone.
Spouses may communicate directly; the commentary says so. A lawyer using the client as a conduit to avoid your lawyer is what the word "indirectly" is aimed at, but it is difficult to establish. Forward the messages to your lawyer and do not negotiate by reply.
Because rule 7.2-9(c) requires it. The letter is telling you, as the rule demands, that the writer acts exclusively for your spouse. Take the statement at face value.
Each state has a version of Rule 4.2 for represented persons and Rule 4.3 for unrepresented ones, modelled on the American Bar Association's rules. California's is quoted above. The principle is the same as the Canadian one; check your state's wording for the details.
Last reviewed September 2026. Researched and written by Neta, founder of SortMyDivorce. I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice — laws, fees and forms change, so please confirm current details with the official sources above or a local family lawyer.
Upload your lawyer letters and SortMyDivorce sorts every deadline, offer and issue into one calm dashboard, automatically.
This guide is general information, not legal advice. Laws change and differ by jurisdiction — confirm specifics with a local family lawyer or your court's official website. If you use SortMyDivorce, your letters stay confidential — never shared, never sold.