Can a New Jersey lawyer who is also a CPA put the CPA designation on the law-office letterhead?

Plain-English summary

An attorney asked whether he could designate on his letterhead that he is also a CPA. The Committee noted that the April 1, 1979 amendments to DR 2-101 et seq. were enacted to bring New Jersey into substantial compliance with Bates v. Arizona. It then read two provisions together. DR 2-102(D) bars a lawyer engaged both in the practice of law and another profession or business from so indicating on a letterhead, office sign, or professional card, or identifying himself as a lawyer in any publication in connection with the other profession. DR 2-102(E) permits use, in connection with a lawyer's name, of an earned degree or title indicating his training in the law.

The question was whether the CPA designation is an earned degree or title indicating legal training (so as to fall within the DR 2-102(E) permission) and whether the Committee's earlier Opinion 23 should be modified. The Committee held it is not. It reaffirmed Opinion 23, which had held that a lawyer-CPA could not state on stationery or professional cards that he is also a certified public accountant, quoting a New York City Bar opinion that the term "certified public accountant" denotes no legal specialty or branch of law and that referring to it advertises qualifications for a separate and distinct profession.

The Committee concluded that Bates gives no encouragement for permitting the CPA designation on a lawyer's letterhead, that DR 2-102(E) does not help the inquirer, and that DR 2-102(D) in fact prevents the CPA designation from being used.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1980, 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. It applied the 1979 advertising amendments (DR 2-102(D), (E)); New Jersey's letterhead and field-of-practice rules now appear at RPC 7.1 and RPC 7.5, and the law of lawyer advertising changed substantially after this opinion. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Could a lawyer-CPA show the CPA credential on the law letterhead?

A: No. The opinion held DR 2-102(D) prevents it, because the CPA designation advertises a separate profession rather than legal training.

Q: Does the rule allowing earned degrees help?

A: No. DR 2-102(E) permits degrees or titles indicating training in the law; the Committee held CPA is not such a title, so the permission did not apply.

Q: Did Bates change the result?

A: No. The opinion found that Bates, which loosened restrictions on lawyer advertising, gave no encouragement for permitting the CPA designation on a lawyer's letterhead.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied the 1979 amendments to New Jersey's advertising and letterhead rules: DR 2-102(D), barring indication of a second profession in connection with the law practice, and DR 2-102(E), permitting earned legal degrees or titles. In current New Jersey terms, the truthful-communication rule corresponds to RPC 7.1 and the firm-name and letterhead rule to RPC 7.5. The holding was that the CPA designation falls under the DR 2-102(D) prohibition, not the DR 2-102(E) permission. This opinion is the authority later applied in Opinion 453 to a directory advertisement.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.1 / NJ RPC 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services)
• MR 7.5 / NJ RPC 7.5 (firm names and letterheads)
• DR 2-102(D), DR 2-102(E) (as in effect 1980)

Cases:

• Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977)

Other opinions cited:

• NJ ACPE Opinion 23, 87 N.J.L.J. 19 (1964) (reaffirmed; lawyer-CPA may not show CPA on stationery)
• Association of the Bar of the City of New York, Committee on Professional Ethics, Opinion 788 (1954)

See also

• NJ ACPE Op. 453: Listing CPA and "Financial" in a Phone Directory
• NJ ACPE Op. 442: Letterhead Stating Various Court Admissions

Source

• Full text (Justia mirror): https://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/advisory-committee-on-professional-ethics/2004/acp447-1.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.

105 N.J.L.J. 119, February 7, 1980

ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL ETHICS

Appointed by the New Jersey Supreme Court

OPINION 447

Lawyer's Use of C.P.A. on Letterhead

An attorney asks whether it is permissible to designate on his letterhead that he is also a C.P.A. The New Jersey Supreme Court Rule Amendments designated DR 2-101, et seq., effective April 1, 1979, were enacted to bring us into substantial compliance with the decision in Bates v. Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977). DR 2-102(D) says: A lawyer who is engaged both in the practice of law and another profession or business shall not so indicate on his letterhead, office sign, or professional card, nor shall he identify himself as a lawyer in any publication in connection with his other profession or business.

DR 2-102(E) states:

Nothing contained herein shall prohibit a lawyer from using or permitting the use of, in connection with his name, an earned degree or title derived therefrom indicating his training in the law.

Counsel asks whether, reading the above two sections together, the use of the C.P.A. designation on the attorney's letterhead is in conflict with either of them. Is the designation C.P.A. an earned degree or title derived therefrom, indicative of a lawyer's training of the law, requiring that our Opinion 23, 87 N.J.L.J. 19 (1964) should be modified? We do not think so. In that opinion, we held that a lawyer/C.P.A. could not state upon his office stationery or his professional cards that he is also a certified public accountant, and quoted from an opinion of the Association of the Bar, City of New York, Committee on Professional Ethics, Opinion 788 (1954), as follows: As for the proposed use of the term "certified public accountant," that in no sense denotes a legal specialty, nor indeed any branch of the law. Reference thereto would constitute an advertisement of qualifications for the practice of a separate and distinct profession, and is therefore disapproved (Canon 27) [Now DR 2-101, 102, 103].

We do not think the Bates decision gives any encouragement for permitting the designation C.P.A. on a lawyer's letterhead. Nor do we think DR 2-102(D) or (E) is helpful to the Inquirer. In fact, it would appear that DR 2-102(D) actually prevents it from being used.