Can a lawyer mail an announcement stating he specializes in administrative and labor law and is a resident partner of an out-of-state firm?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry quoted a proposed announcement: a lawyer announcing his return to practice "specializing in administrative and labor law," his association with a Boston firm, and his role as permanent resident partner of a Southwestern firm. It was assumed the announcement would be mailed only to other attorneys and friends, not placed in newspapers.

The Committee held the announcement would violate the Canons. Canon 42 permits such an announcement only where a member renders a "specialized legal service directly and only to other members." The Committee concluded administrative and labor law are not specialized legal services within the meaning of Canon 42, and that the announcement itself showed the named attorneys would not render their services directly and only to other lawyers. One member thought administrative and labor law should count as specialized services, but that the announcement would still violate Canon 39 because it contained self-laudatory statements and included in the firm name persons who are not members of the State Bar of Texas. The vote was 7-1.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1955, under the former Texas Canons of Ethics, which the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct replaced effective January 1, 1990. The advertising and specialization restrictions the opinion applies predate Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977), and later First Amendment decisions on lawyer advertising, so the Canon 42 and 39 framework used here has since been substantially narrowed. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 the lawyer announce a specialty in administrative and labor law under this opinion?

A: No. The Committee held those fields were not recognized specialties within Canon 42, so the specialty announcement was improper (7-1).

Q: Did mailing it only to lawyers and friends save it?

A: No. Canon 42 allowed such announcements only where the member renders a specialized service directly and only to other lawyers, and the Committee found the announcement showed that was not the case here.

Q: What was the concern with the firm name?

A: One member noted the announcement included in the firm name persons who are not members of the State Bar of Texas and contained self-laudatory statements, which he viewed as a Canon 39 violation.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets former Texas Canon 42 (announcements of specialized legal service) and Canon 39 of the Canons of Ethics of the State Bar of Texas. The modern analogs are ABA Model Rule 7.4 (communication of fields of practice and specialization) and Model Rule 7.5 (firm names and letterhead).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.4 (communication of fields of practice and specialization), as the modern analog
• MR 7.5 (firm names and letterhead), as the modern analog
• Texas Canon 42 (announcements of specialized legal service)
• Texas Canon 39 (advertising)

See also

• TX Ethics Op. 119: Lawyer Status on a Sideline Business Letterhead
• TX Ethics Op. 122: Bar Membership in a Directory Listing
• TX Ethics Op. 133: Lawyer Office Window Signs

Source

• Landing page: https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-112/
• Original PDF: https://tcle-web.s3.amazonaws.com/public/documents/Opinion_112.pdf

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION PRESENTED

Would it violate the Canons of Ethics for an attorney to use the following announcement:

JOHN DOE
announces his return to the practice of law
specializing in administrative and labor law and his association with
ROE AND ROE
Blank Building
Boston, Mass.
Under the Southwestern firm name of
JOHN DOE
Permanent Resident Partner
DOE, ROE AND ROE
Smith Building
Blank, Texas

18 Baylor L. Rev. 239 (1966)

NOTICE OF SPECIALIZED LEGAL SERVICE - ANNOUNCEMENTS
Since administrative and labor law are not recognized specialties, an announcement to the effect that an attorney is specializing in those fields is improper especially when it does not appear that the attorney will render his service directly and only to other attorneys.

Canon 42.

It is assumed that the above-quoted announcement would not be inserted in newspapers, or other similar publications, and would be mailed only to other attorneys and friends. The committee is of the opinion that this announcement would violate the Canons of Ethics since Canon 42 permits such an announcement only where a member is engaged in rendering a "specialized legal service directly and only to other members." We are of the opinion that administrative and labor law are not specialized legal services within the meaning of Canon 42, and that, furthermore, the announcement shows that the attorneys named therein will not render their services "directly and only to other members." One member of the committee is of the opinion that administrative labor law should be regarded as specialized legal services within the meaning of Canon 42, but that the announcement would violate Canon 39 because it contains self laudatory statements and includes in the firm name persons who are not members of the State Bar of Texas. (7-1)

Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 112 (1955)