OKBAR December 9, 1953

May a lawyer display a 'LEX' or Blind Justice automobile license tag ornament like those some doctors use?

Short answer: No. The committee concluded such an insignia is improper indirect advertising under Canon 27, because it would advertise that the person is a lawyer.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1953. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 1953
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 Not binding precedent.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

The committee was asked whether it is ethical for an attorney to use an automobile license tag ornament similar to those used by medical doctors: roughly three to four inches in diameter, round, carrying a "Blind Justice" insignia with the word "LEX" across the top.

The committee answered that under Canon 27 every indirect form of advertising designed to secure professional employment is improper, and that such an insignia would advertise that one was a lawyer. It cited Henry S. Drinker's treatise on legal ethics.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1953, decades before Oklahoma replaced its original Rules of Professional Conduct (patterned on the ABA Canons of Professional Ethics) with the Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct (adopted 1988) and the later Ethics 2000 revisions. Canon 27's flat treatment of indirect advertising no longer reflects current law: the United States Supreme Court held in Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977), that categorical bans on truthful lawyer advertising violate the First Amendment, and lawyer advertising is governed by different rules today. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Why was the auto tag ornament improper?

A: The committee reasoned that under Canon 27 every indirect form of advertising designed to secure professional employment is improper, and the insignia would advertise that the person was a lawyer.

Q: Did it matter that doctors used similar ornaments?

A: The inquiry noted the ornament was similar to those used by medical doctors, but the committee measured the lawyer's conduct by Canon 27 and found the insignia an improper indirect advertisement.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied Canon 27 of the Canons of Professional Ethics, adopted in Oklahoma, which barred indirect advertising designed to secure professional employment. The opinion predates the Model Rules and made no Model Rule citation.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • Canon 27 (ABA Canons of Professional Ethics, adopted by the Oklahoma Bar): every indirect form of advertising designed to secure professional employment is improper.

Other authorities:

  • Henry S. Drinker, Legal Ethics, pp. 247, 288 (example 8)

See also

Source

Original opinion text

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

Adopted December 9, 1953

QUERY

Is it ethical and proper for an attorney to use an automobile license tag ornament as described below?

“The automobile license tag ornanment [sic] to which I refer is one similar to those used by medical doctors, the size being approximately three to four inches in diameter, round and carries an insigna of the “Blind Justice” with the word “LEX” across the top.”

ANSWER

Under Canon 27, every indirect form of advertising, designed to secure professional employment, is improper. Such an insignia would advertise that one was a lawyer. See Legal Ethics by Henry S. Drinker, pages 247 and 288, example 8

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1953 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct and answers your specific situation, with citations.

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