May a Connecticut firm rent its address, conference room, and phone system to an unaffiliated lawyer?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2014. Ask about yours and see what the current Connecticut Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
The Rules do not prohibit a paid arrangement allowing a nonfirm lawyer to use another firm's address, conference room, and phone system. Rules 1.6 and 1.15 require safeguards for confidential information and client property shared or accessible through those resources.
Rules 7.1 and 7.5 also require accurate communications about the practices. The lawyers may not create confusion about a firm, partnership, corporate, of-counsel, or other affiliation that does not exist.
If a prospective client appears confused, the opinion calls for steps to correct the misunderstanding, including an affirmative disclaimer that the lawyers are unaffiliated apart from sharing resources.
In practice
Under this opinion, regular use of another firm's infrastructure does not itself create a firm. The ethics obligations focus on physical and communications safeguards that preserve separation in fact and in public understanding.
Common questions
Q: May the firm charge rent or a usage fee?
A: Yes. The opinion does not prohibit compensation for regular use of the address, room, and phone system.
Q: Does sharing a mailing address create a firm relationship?
A: No, but communications must make the lack of affiliation clear.
Q: What if a prospective client thinks the lawyers are partners?
A: The lawyer must correct the confusion and may need an affirmative nonaffiliation disclaimer.
Q: Which client protections apply?
A: The arrangement must preserve Rule 1.6 confidentiality and Rule 1.15 safekeeping of client property.
Background and rules framework
Rules 1.6 and 1.15 govern client information and property. Rules 7.1 and 7.5 prohibit misleading communications and professional designations.
Citations and references
Connecticut Rules of Professional Conduct:
- Rules 1.6, 1.15, 7.1, and 7.5
Other opinions cited:
- Connecticut Informal Opinions 97-09, 98-11, and 05-18
- Connecticut Formal Opinion 40, office sharing by nonpartner lawyers
- District of Columbia Ethics Opinion 303, shared space and services by unaffiliated lawyers
See also
- LSBA Op. 07-RPCC-013: Office sharing
- Colorado Formal Op. 89: Office sharing and virtual offices
- Florida Ethics Op. 70-14: Office sharing without implied partnership
Source
- Landing page: Connecticut Bar Association Informal Ethics Opinions
- Original PDF: Informal Opinion 14-04
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 2014. Ezel checks the current Connecticut Rules of Professional Conduct against your situation and cites the rules it relies on.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace