Which situation would be considered permissible under Rule 7.3's prohibition on solicitation?

The situation described in the correct answer is permissible under Rule 7.3's prohibition on solicitation because it recognizes that the recipient has actively requested assistance. The ABA Model Rule 7.3 governs the solicitation of clients, particularly focusing on protecting individuals from unwanted solicitation and pressure from lawyers. In this context, if an individual specifically asks for legal assistance or advice, a lawyer responding to that request does not constitute solicitation in the problematic sense that the rule intends to regulate. This exception is fundamental because it respects the agency of the potential client, ensuring that the communication is solicited rather than unsolicited.

In contrast, offering free consultations at public events, in-person solicitations to friends, and solicitation through email marketing are generally regulated more stringently under Rule 7.3. Such actions can be seen as intrusive or coercive if performed without the recipient's prior request, since they may involve reaching out to individuals who have not shown prior interest in engaging a lawyer's services. Therefore, these scenarios would likely violate the intent of Rule 7.3, which prioritizes protecting individuals from unsolicited legal offers.