OSB February 2015

Can lawyers who only share office space call themselves associates, of counsel, or practice under a joint firm name?

Short answer: No. The opinion concludes that lawyers who merely share office space but keep separate practices may not hold themselves out as associates, as of counsel to each other, or under a joint firm name, because doing so falsely implies a partnership or organization in violation of Oregon RPC 7.5 and 7.1.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 2015. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current Oregon Rules of Professional Conduct, with citations.

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 Not binding precedent.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 as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

View original ethics opinion (PDF)

Plain-English summary

Lawyers A, B, and C share office space but otherwise maintain separate practices. The opinion addresses whether they may hold themselves out, through a common letterhead or otherwise, as associates, as of counsel with each other, or under the name "A, B & C, Lawyers." The conclusion is no.

The opinion applies Oregon RPC 7.5(a), which bars a firm name, letterhead, or professional designation that violates RPC 7.1, and RPC 7.5(d), which permits lawyers to state or imply that they practice in a partnership or other organization only when that is a fact. RPC 7.1 prohibits false or misleading communications about a lawyer or the lawyer's services.

Applying these rules, the opinion concludes that using "associates" or "of counsel" for lawyers who are not truly associated but merely share office space and services is misleading because it implies they practice in a partnership or organization when they do not. Likewise, the name "A, B & C, Lawyers" is misleading if no firm exists in which all three are partners, because the name suggests one does.

In practice

The opinion holds that, under the Oregon rules as they stood at the time, the labels lawyers use turn on the underlying fact of how they practice. The opinion treats "associates," "of counsel," and a combined firm name as permissible only when the lawyers are actually associated in that way; for lawyers who merely share space, those designations are misleading under RPC 7.5(d) and 7.1.

Common questions

Q: Can office-sharing lawyers use a shared letterhead naming all of them as a firm?

A: No. The opinion concludes a joint firm name like "A, B & C, Lawyers" is misleading under RPC 7.5 and 7.1 when no actual firm of those lawyers exists.

Q: Can lawyers who share space call each other "of counsel" or "associates"?

A: No, if they are not truly associated. The opinion concludes those terms imply a partnership or organization and are misleading when the lawyers merely share office space.

Q: What does the rule turn on?

A: Whether the implied relationship is a fact. The opinion concludes RPC 7.5(d) lets lawyers state or imply a partnership or organization only when that is true.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Oregon RPC 7.5 (firm names and letterheads), specifically 7.5(a) and 7.5(d), read with RPC 7.1 (false or misleading communications). These track Model Rules 7.5 and 7.1.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

Oregon RPC 7.5(a), (d) / Model Rule 7.5 (firm names and letterheads)
Oregon RPC 7.1 / Model Rule 7.1 (false or misleading communications)

Cases:

In re Sussman and Tanner, 241 Or 246, 405 P2d 355 (1965)
In re Bach, 273 Or 24, 539 P2d 1075 (1975)

Source

Landing page: https://www.osbar.org/ethics/toc.html
Original PDF: https://www.osbar.org/_docs/ethics/2005-12.pdf

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 2015 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Oregon Rules of Professional Conduct and answers your specific situation, with citations.

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