Ezel / Ethics Opinions / NYSBA
NYSBA August 9, 2012

Can a nonprofit legal services organization use 'Project' or 'Law Center' in its name under the New York rules?

Short answer: Yes; a qualified legal assistance organization may use 'Law Center,' and may use 'Project' if the name otherwise signals the group's law-related work and is not otherwise misleading.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 2012. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current New York Rules of Professional Conduct, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 2012
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 Not binding precedent.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) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

Plain-English summary

A person planning to start a non-profit legal services organization asked whether its name could include the terms "Project" and "Law Center." The opinion answers yes for a qualified legal assistance organization, with conditions, and is careful to limit its reach to such organizations.

The analysis runs through Rule 7.5(b), which bars a private-practice lawyer from a trade name or a misleading name and reserves terms like "legal clinic," "legal aid," "legal service office," "legal assistance office," "defender office," "and the like" to qualified legal assistance organizations. Rule 1.0(p) defines a "qualified legal assistance organization" by reference to the four types listed in Rule 7.2(b)(1)-(4); the opinion assumes the contemplated organization would qualify and states the opinion does not apply to private law firms, which are governed by different considerations.

On "Project," the opinion concludes the term may be used if, like the other terms in Rule 7.5(b), it indicates the law-related nature of the work and is not otherwise misleading. It points to Paskowski v. DiBenedetto, where a court found "Domestic Violence Law Project" sufficiently similar to the listed terms, and says "legal" or "law" are not the only acceptable signals (the Rule itself lists "defender office"), but a name like "Poverty Project" would not, without more, be sufficiently similar. On "Law Center," the opinion concludes a qualified legal assistance organization may use it, as it is similar to "Legal Clinic" or "Legal Service Office," provided it is not otherwise misleading.

In practice

Under this opinion, and under the New York rules as they stood at the time, the names "Project" and "Law Center" are available to a qualified legal assistance organization but not, on this analysis, to a private law firm. The condition the opinion places on "Project" is that the full name signal the group's law-related activity; a name that does not (its example is "Poverty Project") would not qualify.

Common questions

Q: Can a nonprofit legal services group call itself a "Law Center"?

A: Yes, if it is a qualified legal assistance organization and the name is not otherwise misleading. The opinion treats "Law Center" as similar to "Legal Clinic" or "Legal Service Office."

Q: Can it use "Project" without the words "law" or "legal"?

A: Yes, if the name otherwise indicates the law-related nature of the work. The opinion cites "Domestic Violence Law Project" as acceptable but says "Poverty Project" alone would not be.

Q: Does this apply to a private law firm?

A: No. The opinion expressly limits itself to qualified legal assistance organizations and states that private law firms are governed by different considerations.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Rule 7.5(b) (Model Rule 7.5) on firm names and misleading names, including its reservation of certain terms to qualified legal assistance organizations, read together with the Rule 1.0(p) definition of that term (which cross-references Rule 7.2(b)).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • MR 7.5 / NY 7.5(b) (firm names; reserved terms for qualified legal assistance organizations)
  • NY 1.0(p) (definition of "qualified legal assistance organization")

Cases:

  • Paskowski v. DiBenedetto, 184 Misc. 2d 34, 705 N.Y.S.2d 521 (Fam. Ct. Rockland Co. 2000), "Domestic Violence Law Project" sufficiently similar to listed terms

Other opinions cited:

  • N.Y. State 740 (2001): using a non-legal-name term can be a trade name
  • N.Y. State 732 (2000): "X Group" permissible where X is the attorney's name and the firm has associates
  • N.Y. State 445 (1976): "Community Law Office" unacceptably misleading for a private law office

See also

Source

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 2012 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current New York Rules of Professional Conduct and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.