Can a law firm note on its office door that one of its members is a state senator?

Plain-English summary

Members of a Florida law firm asked whether they could indicate on the door of their offices that the office was also the office of one of the firm's members who served as a state senator.

The committee concluded they could not. It pointed to its earlier Opinion 64-67, since withdrawn, which had concluded that a lawyer who was a member of the state legislature could not indicate that fact on his professional letterhead. The committee saw no distinction between the door proposal and the letterhead practice it had condemned in 64-67, and held that both violated Canon 27.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1968, before The Florida Bar's adoption of the 2006 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct, and well before the 1977 Bates v. State Bar of Arizona decision reshaped lawyer-advertising restrictions. It applied the former Canon 27 on advertising and the listing of a lawyer's other positions. Firm names, letterhead, and trade names are now addressed by Rule 4-7.21 (the opinion's own header notes current 4-7.21(e)). Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against the current rules before relying on any specific requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Could a lawyer who held public office advertise that office on firm materials?

A: Under this opinion, no. The committee held that displaying a member's state-senator status on the office door violated Canon 27, the same conclusion it had reached for legislative status on a lawyer's letterhead in withdrawn Opinion 64-67.

Q: Did the committee distinguish the office door from letterhead?

A: No. The committee said it saw no distinction between displaying the fact on the door and displaying it on letterhead; both, in its judgment, violated Canon 27.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied the former Canon 27, which restricted how a lawyer could publicize professional and other affiliations. Firm names, letterhead, and trade names are now addressed by Rule 4-7.21 of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar; the opinion's header cross-references current Rule 4-7.21(e). The Model Rule analogue is Rule 7.5.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Canon 27 [Canons of Professional Ethics; see current Rule 4-7.21(e)]

Other opinions cited:

• Florida Opinion 64-67 (since withdrawn): legislative status on a lawyer's letterhead

See also

• FL Bar Ethics Op. 68-58: Naming a Professional Association
• FL Bar Ethics Op. 68-36: Using 'Law Offices of' Heading
• FL Bar Ethics Op. 69-20: Deceased Partner Names in PA Name

Source

• Landing page: https://www.floridabar.org/etopinions/etopinion-68-29/
• Original PDF: https://www-media.floridabar.org/uploads/2017/04/FL-Bar-Ethics-Op-68-29-2.pdf

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

FLORIDA BAR ETHICS OPINION
OPINION 68-29
June 7, 1968
Advisory ethics opinions are not binding.
A law firm may not reflect on the door of its offices that the offices are also the office of one of the members of the firm who is a state senator.
Canon: 27 [See current 4-7.21(e)]
Opinion: 64-67
Chairman MacDonald stated the opinion of the committee:
Members of a Florida law firm inquire as to whether they may reflect on the door of their offices the fact that the offices are also the office of one of the members of the firm who is a state senator. In our opinion 64-67 [since withdrawn] we previously concluded that it would not be proper for an attorney who was a member of the state legislature to indicate that fact on his professional letterhead. We see no distinction between the present proposal and the proposal which we condemned in 64-67. Both in our judgment violate Canon 27.