May a North Dakota lawyer use a client's letterhead in pre-lawsuit and lawsuit collection correspondence?

Plain-English summary

The requesting lawyer asked whether a bill-collection procedure was ethical under Ethics Opinion 39. The committee analyzed DR 2-102A4, which it said allows an attorney to be designated as general counsel on a client's letterhead if the attorney or firm devotes a substantial amount of professional time to representing that client. The committee said the letter did not make clear whether that substantial-time condition was met.

The committee distinguished the use of a client's stationery from the use of legal-counsel letterhead in pre-lawsuit collection correspondence. It said the client's stationery “may not be prohibited by this disciplinary rule,” but concluded that using legal-counsel letterhead in pre-lawsuit collection correspondence would violate paragraph 8 of Ethics Opinion 39 and should be discontinued.

For the general lawsuit collection process, the committee said there should be no problem with staff drafting correspondence if the lawyer carefully reviewed and personally signed every letter and the letters were mailed by the lawyer's office. If staff had follow-up contact with the debtor, the committee placed responsibility on the lawyer to monitor or conduct the negotiations, including monetary negotiations under paragraph 4 of Opinion 39. It said no procedure revision was needed if that was already occurring, and remedial action was needed if it was not.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1984 under the former disciplinary rule DR 2-102A4. A later North Dakota ethics opinion states, “On August 1, 2006, material changes to N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.10(a) will take effect.” 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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, deadline, or requirement.

Common questions

Q: May a lawyer use a client's stationery in collection work?

A: The committee said use of a client's stationery “may not be prohibited by this disciplinary rule,” but its conclusion turned on the separate restrictions in Ethics Opinion 39 for pre-lawsuit collection correspondence.

Q: May legal-counsel letterhead be used for pre-lawsuit collection letters?

A: No under this opinion. The committee said that use would violate paragraph 8 of Ethics Opinion 39 and should be discontinued.

Q: May staff draft letters in a lawsuit collection process?

A: The committee said there should be no problem if all correspondence is carefully reviewed and personally signed by the lawyer and mailed by the lawyer's office.

Q: Who must handle follow-up negotiations with the debtor?

A: The committee said the lawyer is responsible to monitor or conduct the negotiations, including monetary negotiations under paragraph 4 of Opinion 39.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets DR 2-102A4, which the committee described as permitting designation of an attorney as general counsel on a client's letterhead when the attorney or firm devotes a substantial amount of professional time to representing the client. It also applies the restrictions in paragraphs 4 and 8 of Ethics Opinion 39 to collection correspondence and negotiations.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• DR 2-102A4, designation of an attorney as general counsel on a client's letterhead.

Other opinions cited:

• Ethics Opinion 39, paragraphs 4 and 8, collection negotiations and collection correspondence.

See also

• NE Ethics Op. 75-6: Legal Counsel on Client Letterhead
• NY State Bar Op. 494: CPA License on Letterhead

Source

• Landing page: https://www.sband.org/page/ethics_opinions
• Original PDF: https://web.archive.org/web/20250000000000id_/https://www.sband.org/resource/resmgr/docs/for_lawyers/84-01.pdf

Original opinion text

Full opinion text unavailable from the official source; see the linked source above for the complete text.