Can a Florida lawyer who is a retired or former judge use the title 'Judge' on letterhead, business cards, or in advertising?

Plain-English summary

The Supreme Court of Florida asked The Florida Bar to review the use of the title "Judge" by retired judges who practice law, after it came to the Court's attention that some attorneys who are retired judges identify themselves as "Judge Jane Doe (Ret.)" or "Judge (Ret.)" on letterhead, business cards, and advertisements. The committee noted that earlier Florida opinions on former judges using "judge" predated the current advertising rules and the creation of the Standing Committee on Advertising. It cited Florida Ethics Opinions 73-27, 73-31, and 75-34, which had each found it improper for a former judge in practice to be identified as "Judge X" through an answering service, a nameplate, or corporate stationery, and ABA Formal Opinion 95-391, which took a similar position that former judges should not use "Judge" or "The Honorable" while practicing law.

The committee agreed with those opinions. It relied on Rule 4-7.2(c)(1), which prohibits false, misleading, or deceptive communications about a lawyer's services, and Rule 4-8.4(e), which prohibits a lawyer from stating or implying an ability to improperly influence a government agency or official. The committee concluded that using "Judge" before the lawyer's name, regardless of a "former" or "retired" modifier, is misleading because the person is no longer a judge and the title may lead the public to believe the person can exert improper influence in the judicial system. It found it improper to use the term as a title or in any way implying special influence.

The committee drew a line: while "Judge" may not be used as a title, lawyers may provide accurate and truthful information about their prior judicial experience. The opinion gives examples of permissible descriptions such as "retired circuit judge," "former county judge," or "former general magistrate."

In practice

Under the rules as stated in this 2009 opinion, the opinion holds that a former or retired judge actively practicing law may not place "Judge" before his or her name as a title on letterhead, business cards, or advertising, and that adding "former" or "retired" does not cure the problem. The opinion treats the analysis as turning on whether the communication is misleading or implies improper influence under Rule 4-7.2(c)(1) and Rule 4-8.4(e). It permits accurate descriptions of past judicial service, such as "retired circuit judge" or "former county judge," distinguishing a truthful statement of experience from use of the title itself.

Common questions

Q: Can a Florida lawyer who used to be a judge put "Judge" on a business card or letterhead?

A: No. The opinion concludes that a retired or former judge actively practicing law may not use "Judge" as a title on letterhead, business cards, or advertising.

Q: Does adding "(Ret.)" or "former" make it acceptable to use "Judge" as a title?

A: No. The opinion states that the title is misleading regardless of whether it is modified by "former" or "retired," because the person is no longer a judge and the title may imply an ability to exert improper influence.

Q: Can a former judge mention their judicial experience at all?

A: Yes. The opinion permits accurate and truthful descriptions of prior judicial experience, giving examples such as "retired circuit judge," "former county judge," or "former general magistrate."

Q: Which rules does the opinion rely on?

A: The opinion relies on Rule 4-7.2(c)(1) (false, misleading, or deceptive communications) and Rule 4-8.4(e) (stating or implying an ability to improperly influence a government agency or official), and cites ABA Formal Opinion 95-391.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Rule 4-7.2(c)(1) (Model Rule 7.1, prohibiting false or misleading communications about a lawyer's services) and Rule 4-8.4(e) (Model Rule 8.4(e), prohibiting statements implying an ability to influence a government agency or official improperly). It builds on earlier Florida opinions 73-27, 73-31, and 75-34 and on ABA Formal Opinion 95-391. The misleading-communications provision then in Rule 4-7.2(c)(1) was later renumbered into Rule 4-7.13 in the 2013 advertising-rule revisions.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Model Rule 7.1 / Fla. Rule 4-7.2(c)(1) (false, misleading, or deceptive communications; later 4-7.13)
• Model Rule 8.4(e) / Fla. Rule 4-8.4(e) (implying improper influence on a government official)

Other opinions cited:

• Fla. Ethics Op. 73-27 (former municipal judge and answering service)
• Fla. Ethics Op. 73-31 (former judge's nameplate)
• Fla. Ethics Op. 75-34 (former judge on corporate stationery)
• ABA Formal Op. 95-391 (former judges' use of "Judge" or "The Honorable")

See also

• FL Bar Advertising Op. A-99-1: Newsletter Filing
• FL Bar Advertising Op. A-00-1: Chat Room Solicitation

Source

• Landing page: https://www.floridabar.org/etopinions/etopinion-a-09-1/
• Original PDF: https://www-media.floridabar.org/uploads/2018/04/FL-Bar-Advertising-Op-A-09-1.pdf

Original opinion text

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

FLORIDA BAR ADVERTISING OPINION
OPINION A-09-1
June 25, 2009

Advisory advertising opinions are not binding.

A retired judge may not use the term "Judge" as a title on letterhead, business cards or in advertising regardless of whether the title is modified by "former" or "retired" while actively engaged in the practice of law after leaving the bench, but may accurately indicate that he or she is a "retired judge" or "former judge."

RPC: 4-7.2(c)(1), 4-8.4(e)
Opinions: 73-27, 73-31, 75-34, ABA Formal Opinion 95-391

The Supreme Court of Florida has asked The Florida Bar to review the issue of use of the title "Judge" by retired judges in the practice of law. It has come to the Court's attention that some attorneys who are retired judges and who are engaged in the active practice of law use the term "Judge Jane Doe (Ret.)" or otherwise identify themselves as "Judge (Ret)" on letterhead, business cards, and advertisements.

Although there are Florida ethics opinions written on the issue of use of the term "judge" by a former judge who is actively engaged in the practice of law, those opinions were written before the current lawyer advertising rules and before the creation of the Standing Committee on Advertising. For example, Florida Ethics Opinion 73-27 concludes that a lawyer who is a former municipal judge may not permit the lawyer's telephone answering service to answer "Judge X's office." Similarly, Florida Ethics Opinion 73-31 determined that a former judge who is actively practicing law may not use a nameplate using "Judge X" on the lawyer's door or desk. Florida Ethics Opinion 75-34 states that a former judge who practices law and serves as a corporate officer may not use "Judge X" on corporate stationary or let corporate employees refer to the lawyer as "Judge" when communicating with third persons.

The American Bar Association has taken a similar position, indicating that former judges should not use the titles of either "Judge" or "The Honorable" while engaged in the practice of law, including answering the telephone "Judge X's Office," having "Judge X" on a nameplate, or using "Judge X." See ABA Formal Opinion 95-391 (1995). The ABA opinion cites concerns that such references are misleading, and may "exaggerate the influence the lawyer may be able to wield."

The Standing Committee on Advertising agrees with the Florida and ABA ethics opinions. Florida Bar rules prohibit lawyers from making false, misleading, or deceptive communications about their services, whether they are misleading by omission or commission. Rule 4-7.2(c)(1), Rules Regulating The Florida Bar. Additionally, a lawyer may not "state or imply an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official or to achieve results by means that violate the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law." Rule 4-8.4(e), Rules Regulating The Florida Bar. The Committee is of the opinion that lawyers should not use the term "Judge" preceding their names, regardless of whether a modifier such as "former" or "retired" is used, when they are actively engaged in the practice of law after leaving the bench.

Such a use is misleading, as the person is no longer a judge, and it may lead the public to believe that the person has an ability to exert improper influence in the judicial system. The Committee therefore finds it improper to use the term as a title, or to use the term in any way that states or implies that the former judge or justice has special influence. On the other hand, the Committee believes that lawyers may properly provide accurate and truthful information to the public about their prior judicial experience. For example, a former judge may include in advertisements an accurate and truthful statement that he or she is a "retired circuit judge," "former county judge" or "former general magistrate."