When a partner leaves a law firm, can the firm keep her name in the firm name, even over her objection?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1997. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current rules of professional conduct in your state, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Opinion 277 (adopted November 19, 1997) answered a founding partner, "Lawyer B" of the firm "A & B," who planned to resign and wanted her name removed from the firm name whether or not she continued practicing. The question was whether the Rules of Professional Conduct require the firm to drop her name at her request when she resigns.
The committee analyzed the question under Rule 7.5(a), which bars a firm name that violates Rule 7.1's prohibition on false or misleading communications, and which expressly allows a lawyer to practice under a trade name. It acknowledged that Comment [1] to Rule 7.5 says it is misleading to use the name of a lawyer not associated with the firm, and that, read broadly, that premise could bar including any departed lawyer's name. But the committee noted that ethics law has long permitted firms to keep the names of deceased or retired partners, treating such names as trade names that identify a group of lawyers rather than asserting that the named lawyers still practice there. The use of the name must be lawful under the property and partnership law governing the commercial use of a person's name; if the firm has no legal right to the name, including it would be both unlawful and misleading.
The committee concluded that a withdrawn partner who is not practicing law elsewhere is in the same position as a retired or deceased partner: not associated with the firm and not practicing law, so the firm name functions as a trade name that does not assert her presence. It therefore held that the firm may keep her name, even over her objection, if (1) the use is authorized under common law, the partnership agreement, or otherwise, and (2) the departed lawyer is not practicing elsewhere. Where both conditions are met, her lack of consent is ethically irrelevant. The committee drew the line at a lawyer practicing elsewhere: including in a firm name the name of a lawyer who is practicing at another firm is misleading and violates Rule 7.5(a), because the identifying value of the trade name yields to the greater risk of misleading the public.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1997, before the District of Columbia's adoption of the 2007 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. Subsequent rule amendments or 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: Must a firm drop a partner's name when she resigns, if she asks?
A: Not necessarily. The committee concluded the firm may keep the name, even over her objection, if it has the legal right to use the name and she is not practicing law elsewhere.
Q: What makes keeping the name permissible?
A: The committee identified two conditions: the firm's use of the name must be authorized under common law, the partnership agreement, or other applicable law, and the departed lawyer must not be practicing elsewhere.
Q: What if the departed partner joins or starts another firm?
A: The committee concluded that including the name of a lawyer who is practicing elsewhere is misleading and violates Rule 7.5(a), so the firm could not keep her name in that situation.
Q: Why is a departed partner's name treated like a retired or deceased partner's?
A: The committee reasoned that in each case the named lawyer is neither associated with the firm nor practicing law, so the firm name operates as a trade name identifying a group of lawyers rather than asserting that the named partner practices there.
Background and rules framework
The opinion interpreted D.C. Rule 7.5(a) (firm names and letterheads, including the trade-name allowance) by reference to Rule 7.1 (no false or misleading communications about a lawyer's services). It relied on the trade-name treatment of retired and deceased partners' names, carried forward from the predecessor Code of Professional Responsibility (former DR 2-102(B) and EC 2-11), and noted that the lawfulness of using a departed lawyer's name depends on property and partnership law.
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- D.C. RPC 7.5(a) / Model Rule 7.5 (firm names and letterheads; trade names)
- D.C. RPC 7.1 / Model Rule 7.1 (no false or misleading communications about services)
Other opinions cited:
- D.C. Ethics Op. 224 (1991); ABA Formal Op. 90-357 (1990); Massachusetts Bar Op. 81-5 (1981); Michigan Informal Op. CI-1001 (1984)
See also
- DC Ethics Op. 332: Firm Names for Solo Practitioners
- DC Ethics Op. 338: Of Counsel and a Partner's Name in Another Firm
- DC Ethics Op. 278: Partnership With a Foreign Lawyer
Source
- Landing page: https://www.dcbar.org/for-lawyers/legal-ethics/ethics-opinions-210-present/ethics-opinion-277
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 1997 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.