Can a lawyer admitted in both Texas and New York send an announcement card about opening a New York office in association with a New York lawyer?

Plain-English summary

Lawyer A, admitted in both Texas and New York, asked whether he could announce his association in a New York firm with Lawyer B, who was admitted only in New York, by an announcement card showing A's Texas office address and the New York address of the firm of A and B.

The Committee said there was nothing per se improper about the card. Because it was not asked about distribution, which Opinion 221 covered, the only question was whether the card was misleading, and it did not appear to be. It noted a slight possible inference, when the card was sent to clients and other proper addressees in Texas, that A was offering a particular type of service, the practice of or consultation on New York law, and that under Opinion 222 no announcement card may list a particular area of practice; but it found the inference here too slight to make the card defective. The Committee concluded that use of the card was proper. The ruling was 9-0.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1962, under the former Texas Canons of Ethics, which the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct replaced effective January 1, 1990. It also predates Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977), which loosened categorical advertising restrictions, though prohibitions on solicitation were not eliminated. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer announce a new out-of-state office by card?

A: Under this opinion, yes. The Committee said there was nothing per se improper about an announcement card listing a Texas office and the New York address of a new association, and that the card did not appear misleading.

Q: Did listing two states' offices suggest an improper area of practice?

A: The Committee saw only a slight possible inference that the lawyer was offering New York-law services, and although announcement cards may not list a particular area of practice, it found that inference too slight to make the card defective.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets former Texas Canon 24, which prohibited advertising and solicitation by lawyers, as applied to a professional announcement card spanning two states. The modern analogs are ABA Model Rule 7.1, on communications concerning a lawyer's services, and Model Rule 7.5, on firm names and professional designations.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services), as the modern analog
• MR 7.5 (firm names and designations), as the modern analog
• Texas Canon 24 (former canon)

Other opinions cited:

• Texas Opinion 221: distribution of announcement cards
• Texas Opinion 222: announcement cards may not list a particular area of practice

See also

• TX Ethics Op. 319: Multi-State Firm Name in Texas
• TX Ethics Op. 276: Out-of-State Lawyer as Law Clerk
• TX Ethics Op. 263: Firm Name Without a Partnership

Source

• Landing page: https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-250/
• Original PDF: https://tcle-web.s3.amazonaws.com/public/documents/Opinion_250.pdf

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION PRESENTED

Lawyer A, a member of the Texas Bar and the New York Bar, inquires whether or not it is proper to announce his association in a New York firm with B, a lawyer who is admitted to the New York Bar only, by use of the following announcement card:

Lawyer A Attorney & Counselor
100 Blank Building
2000 Main Street
Middleton, Texas XX 1-1111
announces the opening
of his New York law offices
in association with Lawyer B

A&B
Attorneys at Law
200 Blank Street
New York, New York
ZZ 2-2222

18 Baylor L. Rev. 327 (1966)

ANNOUNCEMENT CARDS
lt is not improper for an attorney, A, who is a member of the Texas Bar and the New York Bar, to announce his association in a New York firm with B, a lawyer admitted in New York only, by the use of an announcement card listing A's Texas office address and listing the New York address of the firm of A &B.

Canon 24.

There is nothing per se improper about this announcement card and, inasmuch as the committee is not asked about distribution (which is covered in Texas Opinion No. 221), the only question to be considered here is whether or not the card is misleading. It does not appear to be so. There might possibly be a slight inference, when the card is sent to clients and other proper addressees in Texas, that Texas lawyer A is rendering a particular type of legal service, viz., the practice of or consultation as to New York law, and, while no announcement card may list a particular area of practice (Texas Opinion No. 222), the inference here is too slight to render this card defective. The committee is of the opinion that the use of the card is proper. (9-0.)

Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 250 (1962)