Can a collection-practice law office use a letterhead that drops any reference to being a law firm, and can it list a non-lawyer office administrator on the letterhead?

Plain-English summary

The inquirer's firm specialized in representing creditors in consumer financing and handled uncontested collection matters almost entirely through paralegal staff, with a lawyer signing the complaint. In an effort to work around the Committee's Opinion 296 and its supplement, the inquirer designed two letterheads: one giving the lawyer's name plus "and Associates" without indicating it was a law firm, and another using the same name but indicating it was a law office. Both named the office administrator at the bottom center. The inquirer asked whether reference to a law firm could be deleted from letters sent by paralegal personnel, given how much work they did.

Relying on its Opinion 224, the Committee held that a lawyer's name followed by "and Associates" is ethical as long as the names of all associates appear on the letterhead, but that a name without any reference to being a law firm is misleading and is prohibited by DR 2-102(B). It added that this would be true even if the lawyer had no associates but merely shared office space with others, since he could not list them as associates and the letterhead would still be a misleading trade name if used without reference to its being a law firm.

The Committee further held that it is unethical to name an administrator of the law firm on the letterhead, whether or not the administrator is a lawyer. If the administrator is a layman, that is proscribed by DR 2-102(A)(4); if the administrator is a lawyer, it is still improper, because (drawing on Drinker and the Committee's Opinion 296, citing ABA Informal Opinion 1000) a lawyer may not indicate other occupations on his letterhead, and office management is essentially a non-legal occupation. The Committee observed that the only apparent purpose of naming an administrator would be to impress viewers with the firm's size, importance, and efficiency, which is self-laudatory "puffing" proscribed by the Code.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1976, before New Jersey's adoption of the 2004 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct, and predates the 1984 replacement of the Disciplinary Rules by the RPCs. Firm-name and letterhead rules, then in DR 2-102, are now in RPC 7.5, with the false-or-misleading-communication standard in RPC 7.1; the law of lawyer advertising also changed after Bates v. State Bar of Arizona (1977). 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 law office's letterhead leave out that it is a law firm?

A: Under this opinion, no. A letterhead with no reference to being a law firm is misleading and prohibited by DR 2-102(B).

Q: Is "[Name] and Associates" a permissible letterhead?

A: Yes, if the names of all associates appear on the letterhead and it is identified as a law firm.

Q: Can a firm list its office administrator on the letterhead?

A: No. The Committee held it improper to name the administrator, whether a lawyer or a layman, as it is non-legal and self-laudatory.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied DR 2-102(B) and DR 2-102(A)(4), with its Opinions 224 and 296, to a collection firm's proposed letterheads and the listing of an office administrator. In current New Jersey terms, firm-name and letterhead questions are governed by RPC 7.5 and the misleading-communication standard of RPC 7.1.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• DR 2-102(B) (misleading firm names and trade names) and DR 2-102(A)(4) (letterhead content), as in effect 1976; now MR 7.5 / NJ RPC 7.5 and MR 7.1 / NJ RPC 7.1

Other opinions cited:

• NJ ACPE Opinion 224, 94 N.J.L.J. 1206 (1971); Opinion 296, 98 N.J.L.J. 105 (1975), and supplemental Opinion 296, 99 N.J.L.J. 113 (1976)
• ABA Committee on Professional Ethics, Informal Opinion 1000 (1967)

See also

• NJ ACPE Op. 332: Advertising Availability as a Consultant
• NJ ACPE Op. 581: Use of "J.D." on the Business Card of a Non-Practicing Lawyer

Source

• Full text (Justia mirror): https://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/advisory-committee-on-professional-ethics/2004/acp330-1.html
• Issuing authority: New Jersey Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics, via the NJ Courts Supreme Court Committees page

Original opinion text

Reproduced from a full-text mirror of the official opinion for research purposes. The linked official source controls.

99 N.J.L.J. 473, June 3, 1976

OPINION 330

Office Letterhead with Attorney's Name and "and Associates"; Listing Paralegals and Administrator; with or without Legal Identification

The inquirer is a member of a law firm which specializes in representing creditors for consumer financing. It has a large staff of paralegal personnel and in addition to the inquirer there are four other lawyers on the staff. Essentially, a matter for collection is handled exclusively by non-lawyer personnel in all uncontested collection matters, from setting up the file initially, preparation and filing of the pleading, to the entry of default and the issuance of execution, if any. A lawyer does, however, sign the complaint. The inquirer, in an effort to circumvent our Opinion 296, 98 N.J.L.J. 105 (1975), and our supplemental Opinion 296, 99 N.J.L.J. 113 (1976), has designed two letterheads, one merely stating the name of the lawyer and adding "and Associates," without reference to the fact that it is a law firm, and another letterhead using the same name, but indicating that it is a law office. In addition, on both letterheads the name of the person in charge of the administration of the office is named in the center at the bottom. The inquirer seeks an expression from this Committee as to whether it is proper to delete any reference to a law firm in connection with all letters being sent by paralegal personnel inasmuch as so much of the work is conducted by them, rather than by lawyers.

Our Opinion 224, 94 N.J.L.J. 1206 (1971), is dispositive of the inquirer's question. Clearly the name of a lawyer followed by "and Associates" is ethical as long as the names of all associates appear on the letterhead. The name without reference to the fact that it is a law firm is clearly misleading and is proscribed in DR 2-102(B). The use of this letterhead without reference to the fact that it is a law firm would still be unethical, even if the inquirer had no associates as such, but merely shared office space with them. In that event, he could not list them on his letterhead as associates, but the letterhead would still be misleading and in the nature of a trade name were it to be used without reference to the fact that it is a law firm.

Furthermore, it is unethical to name an administrator of the law firm on the letterhead whether that administrator is or is not a lawyer. If the administrator is a layman, the same is proscribed by DR 2-102(A)(4). See also Drinker, Legal Ethics 228 (1965). If the administrator is a lawyer, it is still unethical to name him as such. Drinker, Legal Ethics 228-9 (1965) indicates that it is unethical for a lawyer to indicate on his letterhead other occupations in which he is engaged. Likewise, this Committee, in referring to the ABA Committee on Professional Ethics, Informal Opinion 1000 (1967) in our opinion 296, supra, has already given indirectly the same Opinion, that is, that a lawyer who may be administrator of the law firm may not be so designated on the letterhead. Office management is essentially a nonlegal occupation and in any event, the only purpose which would be apparent in including the designation of an administrator or office manager on the letterhead would be to impress upon those seeing the letterhead the size, importance, and efficiency of the firm, which could be defined as self-laudatory or "puffing". Both of these are proscribed by the Code of Professional Responsibility.