May a lawyer list his graduate degrees, or use 'Doctor' or 'Dr.' before his name, on his shingle, professional card, or letterhead?

Plain-English summary

The committee was asked whether an attorney may refer, on his shingle, professional card, or letterhead, to degrees he received from graduate schools attended before his admission to the bar, and whether he may use "Doctor" or "Dr." before his name on those items or in introducing himself.

The committee held the practice improper. It read Canon 27, which prohibits lawyer advertising, as permitting schools attended, dates of graduation, degrees, and other educational distinctions to be shown in a reputable law list, and by implication as not permitting them elsewhere. It concluded that using "Juris Doctorate" or "Doctor" on a letterhead, shingle, or professional card, or allowing an introduction with the title "Doctor," would serve only to indicate special qualifications as a lawyer and would be self-laudation in violation of Canon 27. It quoted Drinker's Legal Ethics for the point that the rule is now the same for shingles and letterheads and that a lawyer may not display "Doctor of Juris Prudence" on his shingle.

The committee distinguished its earlier Advisory Opinion 237, which limited professional announcements to names, firm and relationship information, office addresses, and statements about commencing or resuming practice. It reasoned that the line must be drawn even more sharply for shingles, cards, and letterheads, which are used daily, than for a one-time announcement.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1967, during the era of the Canons of Professional Ethics, before Oklahoma adopted the Oklahoma Rules of Professional Conduct (1988) and the later Ethics 2000 revisions. The advertising premises underlying this 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 truthful statements of a lawyer's degrees are treated differently 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 list his graduate degrees on his letterhead or business card?

A: Under this opinion, no. The committee read Canon 27 to allow degrees and educational distinctions only in a reputable law list, not on a shingle, card, or letterhead.

Q: Could a lawyer call himself "Doctor" based on a J.D. or other degree?

A: No. The committee concluded that using "Doctor" on these items or in introductions would be self-laudation indicating special qualifications, in violation of Canon 27.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied Canon 27 of the Canons of Professional Ethics, adopted in Oklahoma, which barred advertising and self-laudation while allowing educational distinctions to appear in a reputable law list. It relied on Drinker's Legal Ethics and distinguished its earlier announcement opinion (Advisory Opinion 237). 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): bars advertising and self-laudation; allows educational distinctions only in a reputable law list.

Other opinions cited:

• ABA Standing Committee on Professional Ethics Formal Opinion No. 183 and Informal Opinions Nos. C-409, C-445, and C-712.
• Oklahoma Bar Association Advisory Opinion No. 237.

See also

• Okla. Bar Ethics Op. 237: Professional announcements, recipients and content
• Okla. Bar Ethics Op. 236: Signs and lettering on office doors and windows
• Okla. Bar Ethics Op. 233: Lawyer listings in telephone directories

Source

• Landing page: https://www.okbar.org/ethics/ethics-opinion-no-247/

Original opinion text

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

Adopted May 11, 1967

INQUIRY

This Committee has been requested to render an Opinion as to whether or not an attorney may refer to degrees received by him from graduate schools which he attended prior to his admission to the Bar on his shingle, professional card or letterhead. He further asked the question as to whether or not he could use the word (Doctor) or (Dr.) preceding his name upon any of the above mentioned items or in introducing himself to others.

OPINION

Canon 27, which prohibits advertising by lawyers, provides that schools attended, with dates of graduation, degrees and other education distinctions, may be shown in reputable law list, and at least by implication provides that they may not be shown elsewhere. We feel that it is improper for a lawyer to use the designation Juris Doctorate or Doctor on a letterhead, shingle or professional card, introduce himself or allow an introduction with the title Doctor preceding his name, on the grounds that the only purpose of such designation would be to indicate special qualifications as a lawyer and would be self-laudation in violation of Canon 27.

Drinker on Page 231 of his book (Legal Ethics) states that:

"Some years ago the American Bar Association Committee approved certain designations on the shingle which it did not sanction on a letterhead, the rule is now the same for both and a lawyer may not display on his shingle the designation Doctor of Juris Prudence."

In Advisory Opinion No. 237 of the Oklahoma Bar Association, Syllabus 6, we held that:

"A professional announcement can contain only the name or names of the lawyers and firm concerned, change in relationship with any, the lawyer or lawyers involved, applicable office address or addresses, and a statement with respect to commencing or continuing or resuming the practice of law."

In comparison it would seem that the line must be drawn more sharply herein since we are asked specifically about letterheads, shingles or professional cards which are used daily as distinguished from an announcement.

See also Formal Opinions No. 183 and Informal Opinions No. C_409, C_445, and C_712 of the Standing Committee on Professional Ethics of the American Bar Association.