Can I put a rooftop sign on my law office that says 'Benefits for the Injured' beneath the firm name?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney asked whether a proposed outdoor advertising sign was appropriate under Rule 7 of the Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct. The proposed sign would be approximately 15 1/2 feet long and 4 1/2 feet high, placed on the roof of the building housing the attorney's law offices. It would state the name of the law firm, beneath which, in eight-inch letters, would appear the statement "Benefits for the Injured."

The panel concluded that the statement "Benefits for the Injured" violates Rule 7.1 of the Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct because it is ambiguous and lacks sufficient facts to make the phrase, considered as a whole, not materially misleading.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1991, after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988, and it applies Rule 7.1 as originally adopted. The Rhode Island Supreme Court later revised the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2007 as part of the nationwide Ethics 2000 process, which renumbered and amended several provisions, including the advertising rules. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a law firm sign say "Benefits for the Injured"?

A: Under this opinion, no. The panel concluded the phrase violates Rule 7.1 because it is ambiguous and materially misleading absent sufficient facts.

Q: Why is the phrase a problem?

A: Per the opinion, it is ambiguous and lacks sufficient facts to make the phrase, considered as a whole, not materially misleading.

Q: Was the size or placement of the sign the issue?

A: No. The panel described the sign's dimensions and rooftop placement but rested its conclusion on the misleading nature of the phrase "Benefits for the Injured," not on the sign's size or location.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Rule 7.1 (Communications Concerning a Lawyer's Services), corresponding to Model Rule 7.1, which bars false or misleading communications about a lawyer or the lawyer's services. The panel measured the proposed sign's language against Rule 7.1's standard and found the phrase materially misleading because it was ambiguous and unsupported by sufficient facts.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services)
• RI RPC 7.1

Statutes:

• None cited.

Cases:

• None cited.

Other opinions cited:

• None cited.

See also

• RI EAP Op. 91-42: A Paralegal's Name on Firm Materials
• RI EAP Op. 91-47: Using a Maiden Name for Professional Purposes

Source

• Landing page: https://www.courts.ri.gov/attorney-resources/Pages/Ethics-Advisory-Panel-default.aspx
• Original PDF: https://www.courts.ri.gov/Opinions/EAP%2091-50.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

Digest of Ethics Advisory Panel
Opinion #91-50, Request #159
Issued August 16, 1991

An attorney seeks Panel advice as to whether a proposed outdoor advertising sign is appropriate under Rule 7 of the Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct. The attorney indicates the proposed sign would be approximately 15 1/2 feet in length and 4 1/2 feet in height. The sign would be placed on the roof of the building in which the attorney's law offices are located. The sign would state the name of the law firm beneath which, in eight-inch letters, would appear the statement "Benefits for the Injured."

The Panel is of the opinion that the statement "Benefits for the Injured" violates Rule 7.1 of the Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct because it is ambiguous and lacks sufficient facts to make the phrase, considered as a whole, not materially misleading.

Ethics Advisory Panel advice is protective in nature. There is no requirement that an attorney abide by a Panel opinion, but if he or she does, he or she is fully protected from any charge of impropriety.