May a lawyer send Christmas or greeting cards that show 'attorney,' his office address, or images referring to his profession?

Plain-English summary

In late 1959 the Executive Council asked about the propriety of sending Christmas cards to clients signed with the firm name, at a time when bar members were being widely solicited by publishers to order cards bearing pictures such as Santa Claus with a brief case or other images indicative of the profession. The committee held its opinion until after the holidays so it could prepare a more comprehensive answer without infringing on the feelings of those who had unwittingly violated the canon.

The committee concluded that distributing Christmas or other greeting cards bearing the designation "attorney," an office address, or legends or illustrations referring to professional status violates Canon 27, which prohibits indirect as well as direct advertising, and that any greeting card or letter distributed by a law firm would fall within that category. It noted the Texas and Michigan bars had reached the same conclusion (Michigan Opinions Nos. 29 and 170; Texas Opinion No. 168), and that the ABA had condemned a "Year Book" bearing the distributing attorneys' names and addresses (Opinion No. 59) and newspaper "Christmas Greetings" designating attorneys' professional occupation (Opinion No. 107). Quoting the Michigan committee, it said a sincere Christmas greeting is a personal matter between friends and the dignity of the profession should restrain lawyers from the commercial practice of using greetings to advertise, while making clear that it did not intend to restrict an individual attorney from sending personal Christmas cards to friends, acquaintances, and close clients that bear no "attorney" designation, office address, or professional legend or illustration.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1960, 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. The advertising prohibitions underlying the opinion no longer reflect 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 communications are 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Could a lawyer send Christmas cards marked "attorney" or with his office address?

A: No. The committee held that cards bearing the designation "attorney," an office address, or professional images violate Canon 27's bar on indirect advertising.

Q: Could a law firm send firm-signed greeting cards?

A: No. The committee said any greeting card or letter distributed by a law firm would fall within the prohibited category.

Q: Could a lawyer still send personal Christmas cards?

A: Yes. The committee said an attorney may send personal cards to friends, acquaintances, and close clients, so long as they bear no professional designation, office address, or professional legend or illustration.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied Canon 27 of the Canons of Professional Ethics, adopted in Oklahoma, which prohibits direct and indirect advertising, to lawyer-distributed greeting cards. It relied on Michigan Opinions Nos. 29 and 170, Texas Opinion No. 168, and ABA Opinions Nos. 59 and 107. 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): prohibits indirect as well as direct advertising.

Other opinions cited:

• Michigan State Bar Ethics Opinions Nos. 29 and 170: greeting cards bearing professional status violate the advertising canon.
• Texas Ethics Opinion No. 168: same conclusion on professional greeting cards.
• ABA Formal Opinion No. 59: a "Year Book" bearing the distributing attorneys' names and addresses is improper.
• ABA Formal Opinion No. 107: newspaper "Christmas Greetings" designating attorneys' occupation violate Canon 27.

See also

• Okla. Bar Ethics Op. 174: Tax leaflet mailed to clients as solicitation
• Okla. Bar Ethics Op. 22: Mailing advertising postcards to other lawyers
• Okla. Bar Ethics Op. 89: Mailing form letters to solicit tax-refund work

Source

• Landing page: https://www.okbar.org/ethics/ethics-opinion-no-206/

Original opinion text

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

Adopted August 11, 1960

The Executive Council has submitted to the Legal Ethics Committee the following inquiry:

INQUIRY

In the late fall of 1959 the Executive Council submitted to the Ethics Committee an inquiry concerning the propriety of sending Christmas cards to clients and signing the firm name. At the same time members of the Bar were being widely solicited by publishing companies to order Christmas cards bearing the picture of Santa Claus with a brief case or some other picture or legend indicative of the profession. It was felt that an opinion on the subject should be withheld until after the holiday season, at which time an opinion of a more comprehensive nature could be prepared which would not infringe on the feelings of those who had unwittingly been guilty of a violation.

OPINION

The distribution of Christmas or other greeting cards by a lawyer bearing the designation “attorney” or his office address or legends or illustrations referring to his professional status constitutes a violation of Canon 27, which prohibits indirect as well as direct advertising. Obviously, any type greeting card or letter distributed by a law firm would fall within this category. Both the Texas and Michigan Bar Associations have reached this conclusion on similar inquiries (Michigan Opinion Nos. 29 and 170; Texas Opinion No. 168.) The American Bar Association in Opinion No. 59 condemned the distribution of a “Year Book” which bore the name and address of the attorneys distributing the same and in Opinion No. 107 found that “Christmas Greetings” published in a local newspaper by certain attorneys designating their professional occupation constituted a violation of Canon 27.

The language of the Michigan Committee is, in our opinion, most appropriate:

“A sincere Christmas greeting is definitely a personal matter between friends. Lay business people have, upon occasion, perverted the use of Christmas greetings for advertising purposes. The dignity of the profession of the law should restrain members of the bar from following such commercial practice ….”

………….

“In reaching its conclusion earlier stated in the present opinion, the committee does not intend to circumscribe or restrict in any manner the practice of an individual attorney sending to his personal friends and acquaintances, including clients with whom he is in close personal relationship, his own personal Christmas cards, which neither bear the designation “attorney” or his office address, nor legend or illustration referring to his professional status.”