Can a former judge who returns to practicing law keep using the title 'Judge' or 'The Honorable' on letterhead, in pleadings, on the phone, or in the courtroom?

Plain-English summary

The committee was asked whether a former judge who returns to practicing law may keep using the honorific "Judge", on the telephone, on a door or desk, on firm letterhead, in signatures on correspondence and pleadings, and in being referred to in the courtroom. It drew a line between a former judge who leaves the bench and stops practicing law, who the committee saw no reason could not keep using the title, and a former judge who returns to practice, for whom continued use is improper.

The committee reasoned that the title is an honorific, and that the real question is "whether the use of the title is misleading because it may be misunderstood by the public as suggesting some type of special influence, and whether its use by a former judge practicing law serves any proper purpose." It located the analysis in Rule 7.1, which bars false or misleading communications about a lawyer's services, and Rule 7.5, which prohibits letterhead that violates Rule 7.1. It added that Rule 8.4(e), which prohibits statements implying an ability to improperly influence a government official, "can also come into play," and that the committee further weighed fairness to opposing counsel and, more importantly, opposing parties.

Applying those rules, the committee concluded that using the title "Judge" in legal communications and proceedings by a former judge who practices law is misleading and serves no proper purpose, and so is improper. The prohibition covers the full range of uses presented: how the phone is answered, the nameplate and letterhead, signatures on correspondence and pleadings, and encouraging others to use the title in or around legal proceedings.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1995, before the American Bar Association's adoption of the 2002 (Ethics 2000) revisions to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Subsequent rule amendments and later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a retired judge ever use the title "Judge"?

A: The opinion said a former judge who leaves the bench and does not practice law may continue to use the title; the prohibition applies to a former judge who returns to the practice of law.

Q: Why is using "Judge" in practice a problem?

A: The committee concluded it is a misleading communication under Rule 7.1, because the public may misunderstand it as suggesting special influence, and it serves no proper purpose in the practice of law.

Q: Does the ban cover letterhead and pleadings, or just how the phone is answered?

A: It covers all of them. The opinion specifically prohibited the title on letterhead, nameplates, and signatures on correspondence and pleadings, as well as on the telephone and in courtroom references.

Q: Which rules did the committee rely on?

A: Primarily Rule 7.1 (false or misleading communications) and Rule 7.5 (letterheads), with Rule 8.4(e) (implying improper influence over an official) also potentially in play.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interpreted Rule 7.1 (communications about a lawyer's services; false or misleading communications), Rule 7.5 (firm names and letterheads, which may not violate Rule 7.1), and Rule 8.4(e) (stating or implying an ability to influence a government agency or official improperly). It treated a former judge's continued use of the judicial title in practice as misleading under those rules. Because the ABA interprets the Model Rules directly, there is no state-rule analogue.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services; false or misleading communications)
• MR 7.5 (firm names and letterheads)
• MR 8.4(e) (implying ability to influence a government official improperly)

See also

• ABA Formal Op. 90-357: Use of the "of counsel" designation
• ABA Formal Op. 94-388: Relationships among law firms

Source

• Landing page: ABA Formal Ethics Opinions index
• Original PDF: 95-391.pdf