Ezel / Ethics Opinions / NVBAR
NVBAR February 24, 1995

Can a lawyer who lives in Nevada but is licensed only in other states use letterhead with a Nevada address?

Short answer: The Committee concluded that an attorney who lives in Nevada but is licensed only in other states may not use letterhead showing a Nevada address and his out-of-state admissions unless it is modified to disclose that he is not licensed to practice in Nevada, because otherwise the letterhead has too great a potential to mislead recipients about his Nevada qualifications.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1995. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current rules of professional conduct in your state, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 1995
Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later opinions or rule amendments may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original ethics opinion (PDF)

Plain-English summary

A sole practitioner who lived in Nevada but was licensed only in States A and B (not Nevada) asked whether he could use letterhead listing his Nevada office address, the title "Attorney And Counselor At Law," and the line "Admitted to Practice: State A, State B," without saying he was not admitted in Nevada. The Committee answered that he could not unless the letterhead disclosed his non-licensure in Nevada.

The Committee explained that SCR 199 (Nevada's firm-name rule) is meant to keep those who have not demonstrated competence through Nevada bar admission from holding themselves out, directly or by implication, as qualified to practice in Nevada. It distinguished Formal Opinion 11, where a Nevada-licensed lawyer practiced under his own name and showed an out-of-state firm affiliation; here, by contrast, the lawyer was not licensed in Nevada at all, so a Nevada address without a disclaimer could lead recipients to assume he was admitted in Nevada in addition to States A and B.

The Committee noted that individual lawyers listed on Nevada firm letterhead must show their jurisdictional limitations (citing a New York County Lawyers' Association opinion approving notations like "Not Admitted in New York"). It found In re Waters, where the Nevada Supreme Court allowed a Texas lawyer living in Nevada to correspond with California prisoners who knew his status, not controlling, because that decision turned on the recipients' awareness and did not address potentially misleading letterhead sent to less-informed prospective clients with Nevada matters. The Committee concluded the proposed letterhead carried too great a potential to mislead, including even his State A and B clients, and so must specifically disclose that the attorney is not licensed in Nevada.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1995, before Nevada's 2006 adoption of the current Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct (the renumbered Rules 1.0 et seq. that replaced the former Supreme Court Rules) and the related Ethics 2000-based revisions. The firm-name and letterhead rule is now Rule 7.5, which itself addresses jurisdictional limitations on lawyers practicing in more than one jurisdiction. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a Nevada-resident lawyer licensed only in other states put a Nevada address on letterhead?

A: Only with a disclaimer. The opinion concluded the letterhead may not be used unless it discloses that the attorney is not licensed to practice in Nevada.

Q: Why is the undisclosed Nevada address a problem?

A: Per the opinion, a Nevada address combined with out-of-state admissions and no disclaimer could lead recipients, including the lawyer's own out-of-state clients, to assume he is also admitted in Nevada.

Q: Does it matter that the lawyer says he won't solicit Nevada clients?

A: The opinion found that insufficient; even limiting correspondence to clients in the licensed states, the letterhead's potential to mislead about Nevada qualifications was too great without an explicit disclaimer.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets former SCR 199 (firm names and letterheads, now Rule 7.5), reading its bar on implying Nevada qualifications against ABA Model Rule 7.5(b)'s requirement that lawyers practicing in more than one jurisdiction indicate their jurisdictional limitations.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • Model Rule 7.5 / former Nev. SCR 199 (firm names and letterheads; jurisdictional limitations)

Cases:

  • Pioneer Title Insurance & Trust Co. v. State Bar of Nevada, 74 Nev. 186 (1958) (public interest in assurance of competence)
  • In re Waters, 84 Nev. 712 (1968) (distinguished; out-of-state lawyer corresponding with informed out-of-state clients)

Other opinions cited:

  • N.Y. County Lawyers' Ass'n Comm. on Professional Ethics Op. 683 (1990) (disclose status with a notation such as "Not Admitted in New York")
  • State Bar of Nevada Formal Opinion 11 (out-of-state firm affiliation on letterhead)

See also

Source

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1995 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.