Can a law firm list nonlawyer employees by name on its letterhead, website, and business cards?

Plain-English summary

The Board revisited its 23-year-old Advisory Opinion 89-16, which had considered whether nonlawyer employees may be named on law firm letterhead and business cards. Opinion 89-16 had allowed nonlawyer names on business cards if titles and language indicating nonlawyer status were also printed, but had concluded that listing nonlawyers on letterhead was prohibited in Ohio, in part because the Supreme Court of Ohio had not then adopted the Model Rules and the Board declined to follow contrary ABA guidance (ABA Informal Op. 1527). The Board noted that law firm websites have since become a primary method of communicating with clients and the public, and expanded its consideration to websites.

Applying Prof. Cond. R. 7.1 (false, misleading, or nonverifiable communications) and R. 7.5 (firm names and letterhead), the Board concluded that a law firm's letterhead and website may list the names of nonlawyer employees if the employees are clearly identified as nonlawyers through job titles or other identifiers that differentiate the lawyers from the nonlawyers. Similarly, business cards may bear a nonlawyer employee's name if the card includes a job title or other language indicating the employee is not licensed to practice law. The Board withdrew Opinion 89-16.

In practice

The opinion holds that, under Ohio Prof. Cond. R. 7.1 and 7.5 as they stood at the time of the opinion, naming nonlawyer employees on a firm's letterhead, website, or business cards is permitted so long as the materials clearly identify those employees as nonlawyers, through job titles or other differentiating language. Per the opinion, the key is that the communication not mislead the public about who is licensed to practice law. The opinion withdrew the contrary letterhead restriction of Opinion 89-16.

Common questions

Q: Can an Ohio law firm put a paralegal's name on its letterhead?

A: The opinion concluded yes; letterhead may list nonlawyer employees if they are clearly identified as nonlawyers through job titles or other identifiers that differentiate them from the lawyers.

Q: Does the same rule apply to the firm's website?

A: The opinion concluded yes; it expanded the analysis to websites and reached the same result, requiring clear identification of nonlawyer status.

Q: What about business cards for nonlawyer staff?

A: The opinion concluded business cards may bear a nonlawyer employee's name if they include a job title or other language indicating the employee is not licensed to practice law.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Ohio Prof. Cond. R. 7.1 (false, misleading, or nonverifiable communications) and R. 7.5 (firm names and letterhead) (Model Rules 7.1, 7.5), updating the Board's earlier treatment under the former Code and extending it to law firm websites.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Ohio Prof. Cond. R. 7.1 (false, misleading, or nonverifiable communications) (Model Rule 7.1)
• Ohio Prof. Cond. R. 7.5 (firm names and letterhead) (Model Rule 7.5)

Other opinions cited:

• Ohio BPC Op. 89-16 (1989) (withdrawn by this opinion): nonlawyers on letterhead and business cards
• ABA Informal Ops. 1185 (1971), 1367 (1976), and 1527 (1989): listing nonlawyers on firm materials

See also

• Ohio BPC Op. 2009-005: "General Counsel" Designation on a Client's Letterhead
• Ohio BPC Op. 2010-001: Area of Practice in a Law Firm Name

Source

• Landing page: https://ohioadvop.org/advisory-opinion-index/
• Original PDF: https://www.ohioadvop.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Op_12-002.pdf

Original opinion text

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

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ON GRIEVANCES & DISCIPLINE
65 SOUTH FRONT STREET, 5TH FLOOR, COLUMBUS, OH 43215-3431
614.387.9370 888.664.8345
RICHARD A. DOVE FAX: 614.387.9379 MICHELLE A. HALL
SECRETARY www.supremecourt.ohio.gov SENIOR COUNSEL

                                   OPINION 2012-2
                                  Issued June 8, 2012

              Identification of Nonlawyers on Law Firm Letterhead,
                           Websites, and Business Cards

SYLLABUS: A law firm’s letterhead and website may list the names of
nonlawyer employees if the employees are clearly identified as nonlawyers
through the use of job titles or other identifiers that differentiate the lawyers
from the nonlawyers. Similarly, a law firm’s business cards may bear the names
of nonlawyer employees if the cards include job titles or other language
indicating the employee is not licensed to practice law. Advisory Opinion 89-16
is withdrawn.

QUESTION PRESENTED: May law firm letterhead and business cards include
the names of nonlawyer employees?

APPLICABLE RULES: Rules 7.1 and 7.5 of the Ohio Rules of Professional
Conduct

OPINION: The Board has been asked to revisit 23-year-old Advisory Opinion
89-16. In that opinion, the Board considered whether the names of nonlawyer
employees may be included on law firm letterhead and business cards. Relying
on two informal opinions of the American Bar Association (ABA), the Board
found that nonlawyer law firm employees could be named on firm business
cards if titles and language indicating the employee’s nonlawyer status were also
printed on the card. Ohio Sup. Ct., Bd. of Comm’rs on Grievances and
Discipline, Op. 89-16 (June 16, 1989), citing ABA Commt. on Ethics and Prof’l
Responsibility, Informal Op. 1185 (1971) and Informal Op. 1367 (1976).

   Although the question presented to the Board is limited to Opinion 89-16,

which only addresses letterhead and business cards, the Board notes that law
Op. 2012-2 2

firm websites are now a primary method of communicating with clients,
prospective clients, and the public. This was not the case in 1989 when the Board
issued Opinion 89-16. Accordingly, the Board will expand its consideration of a
law firm’s letterhead employee listings to law firm websites containing such
listings.

   The Board viewed letterhead differently from business cards in Opinion

89-16. Although another ABA informal opinion stated that law firms could list
nonlawyers on firm letterhead, the Board concluded that the inclusion of
nonlawyers on letterhead was prohibited in Ohio. Op. 89-16 at 2; contra ABA
Commt. on Ethics and Prof’l Responsibility, Informal Op. 1527 (1989). The Board
determined that the ABA opinion interpreted the Model Rules of Professional
Conduct (Model Rules), and because the Supreme Court of Ohio (Court) had not
adopted the Model Rules at the time, the Board found it could not follow the
ABA’s approach. Op. 89-16 at 1-2.

   At the time of Opinion 89-16, the former Code of Professional

Responsibility (Code), and in particular DR 2-102(A)(4), governed the content of
law firm letterhead. As summarized by the Board in Opinion 89-16, DR 2-
102(A)(4) allowed law firm letterhead to include “the name of the law firm,
names of members and associates, and the names and dates relating to deceased
and retired partners.” Id. Interpreting DR 2-102(A)(4) as an “exhaustive list,” the
Board concluded that designating nonlawyer employees on law firm letterhead
violated DR 2-102(A)(4).

   The Court repealed the Code in its entirety effective February 1, 2007, and

adopted the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct (Ohio Rules). The Ohio Rules
are based in large part on the Model Rules. Law firm1 letterhead must now
comply with Prof.Cond.R. 7.5(a), which states that “[a] lawyer shall not use a
firm name, letterhead or other professional designation that violates
[Prof.Cond.R. 7.1].” Prof.Cond.R. 7.1, which is referenced in Prof.Cond.R. 7.5(a),
contains the general provision applicable to all communications concerning a
lawyer or the lawyer’s services. Prof.Cond.R. 7.1 states as follows:

1
In this opinion, the Board intends “law firm” to have the same meaning as in Prof.Cond.R. 1.0: “a lawyer
or lawyers in a law partnership, professional corporation, sole proprietorship, or other association
authorized to practice law; or lawyers employed in a private or public legal aid or public defender
organization, a legal services organization, or the legal department of a corporation or other organization.”
Op. 2012-2 3

    A lawyer shall not make or use a false, misleading, or nonverifiable
    communication about the lawyer or the lawyer’s services. A
    communication is false or misleading if it contains a material
    misrepresentation of fact or law or omits a fact necessary to make
    the statement considered as a whole not materially misleading.

    Reading Prof.Cond.R. 7.1 and 7.5(a) together, the current standard is that

law firm letterhead and websites cannot be false or misleading, or contain a
nonverifiable communication about a lawyer or the lawyer’s services. The only
reference to nonlawyers in these rules appears in comment [1] to Prof.Cond.R.
7.5, which states that it is misleading to use the name of a nonlawyer in a law
firm name. Neither Prof.Cond.R. 7.1 nor Prof.Cond.R. 7.5(a), however, prohibit
the use of nonlawyers’ names on law firm letterhead or website employee
listings. In fact, the “exhaustive list” contained in former DR 2-102(A)(4) and
relied upon by the Board in Opinion 89-16 does not appear in the Ohio Rules. It
is now the Board’s view that law firm letterhead and websites may list the names
of nonlawyer employees if the use of the names is not a false, misleading, or
nonverifiable communication. 2

   In order for law firm letterhead and website employee listings not to be

false or misleading or contain nonverifiable information, a person’s nonlawyer
status must be clearly delineated. See Bennett, Cohen & Whittaker, Annotated
Model Rules of Professional Conduct, 569 (7th Ed. 2011). This may be accomplished
through the use of titles following the names on the letterhead or website that do
not cause confusion about a law firm employee’s ability to practice law.
Examples of such titles include “paralegal,” “legal assistant,” “law clerk,” or
“office administrator.” Another technique to further designate nonlegal staff on
law firm letterhead is to list the lawyers on one side of the letterhead and the
nonlawyers on the other side with the appropriate titles or an explanation. On
law firm websites, greater creativity is possible and nonlawyers may be depicted
on separate web pages or set apart visually with graphics and appropriate

2
A number of states have issued ethics opinions indicating that law firm letterhead may list the names of
nonlawyers. See State Bar of Ariz., Commt. on Rules of Prof’l Conduct, Op. 90-03 (Mar. 16, 1990); Conn.
Bar Assn., Commt. on Prof’l Ethics, Op. 85-17 (Nov. 11, 1985); Fla. State Bar Assn., Commt. on Prof’l
Ethics, Op. 86-4 (Aug. 1, 1986); Haw. Sup. Ct., Office of Disciplinary Counsel, Op. 78-8-19 (July 3,
1984); Ill. St. Bar Assn., Op. 87-01 (Sept. 8, 1987); State Bar of Mich., Standing Commt. on Prof’l and
Judicial Ethics, Op. RI-34 (Oct. 25, 1989); Miss. State Bar, Op. No. 93 (June 7, 1984); N.J. Sup. Ct.,
Commt. on Atty. Advertising, Op. 16 (Jan. 24, 1994); N.C. State Bar, RPC 126 (Apr. 17, 1992); Pa. Bar
Assn. Commt. on Legal Ethics and Prof’l Responsibility, Op. 98-75 (Dec. 4, 1998); S.C. Bar Ethics Adv.
Commt., Op. 05-19 (Oct. 21, 2005); Utah State Bar, Ethics Adv. Commt., Op. No. 131 (May 20, 1993); Va.
State Bar, Op. 970 (Sept. 30, 1987); State Bar of Wis., Commt. on Prof. Ethics, Op. E-85-6 (Oct. 1985).
Op. 2012-2 4

descriptions. A further option would be to identify the firm’s nonlawyers with
an asterisk and an indication on the letterhead or website that the asterisk
signifies employees who are not lawyers. However a law firm chooses to
identify nonlawyer employees on the firm’s letterhead or website, it must be
done in such a way that is not a false, misleading, or nonverifiable
communication under Prof.Cond.R. 7.1. Done correctly, law firm letterhead and
websites that name nonlawyer employees enhance service to clients, prospective
clients, and the public. As stated by the ABA, “[t]he listing of support personnel,
such as the law firm administrator or office manager, administrative assistants,
paralegals or others, appropriately designated may furnish useful information to
the public in determining whether to engage the firm and in learning the status
of members of the support staff with whom they have contact.” ABA Informal
Opinion 89-1527 at 1.

    Consistent with allowing law firms to list appropriately-designated

nonlawyer employees on firm letterhead and websites, the Board reiterates its
position in Opinion 89-16 that firm business cards may identify nonlawyer
employees. Under Prof.Cond.R. 5.3, lawyers must make “reasonable efforts to
ensure” that nonlawyers they employ, retain, or associate with engage in conduct
that is “compatible with the professional obligations of the lawyer.” Like firm
letterhead and websites, then, nonlawyer business cards must comply with
Prof.Cond.R. 7.1 and 7.5(a) and cannot be false or misleading or contain
nonverifiable information. It follows that the business cards of a law firm’s
nonlawyer employees have to include the employee’s title or other explanation
of their role in the firm. Such business cards shall unequivocally communicate
that the person is not a lawyer.

CONCLUSION: The Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct allow law firms to
include the names of nonlawyer employees on the firm’s letterhead, website, and
business cards. However, to avoid being a false, misleading, or nonverifiable
communication under Prof.Cond.R. 7.1 and 7.5(a), letterhead, websites, and
business cards must clearly differentiate the lawyers from the nonlawyers. The
nonlawyers may be identified in a variety of ways, including through the use of
job titles or other explanation of the person’s role in the firm, spacing on the
letterhead, visual techniques on the website, or typographical symbols with
accompanying explanations.

Advisory Opinion 89-16 is withdrawn.
Op. 2012-2 5

Advisory Opinions of the Board of Commissioners on Grievances and
Discipline are informal, nonbinding opinions in response to prospective or
hypothetical questions regarding the application of the Supreme Court Rules
for the Government of the Bar of Ohio, the Supreme Court Rules for the
Government of the Judiciary, the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct, the
Ohio Code of Judicial Conduct, and the Attorney’s Oath of Office.