Can a Texas law firm put a decorative emblem, like the goddess of justice holding the scales, on its letterhead?

Plain-English summary

The question was whether a Texas law firm's letterhead could display the goddess of justice holding the scales of justice, an emblem like the one on the letterhead of a New York appellate court.

The Committee found the question troubling but concluded that, while Canon 24 generally prohibits a self-laudatory advertisement or one calculated to solicit business directly or indirectly, this addition to a letterhead did not appear to fall within that prohibition, so using the emblem did not violate the minimum requirements of professional responsibility. At the same time, several members felt that emblems of any kind are out of keeping with the dignity of the profession, could lead to more questionable emblems, and are best avoided. Those members would label the emblem's use as improper, not because any canon is violated, but because it does not conform to the general standards of the profession. The vote was 9-0.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1964, 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Does putting an emblem on a law firm's letterhead violate the canons?

A: The Committee said no, where the emblem is not self-laudatory and not calculated to solicit work; such an emblem does not fall within Canon 24's prohibition and does not violate the minimum requirements of professional responsibility.

Q: Did the Committee approve the practice?

A: Not entirely. It said the display of such an emblem is frowned upon, with several members viewing it as out of keeping with the dignity of the profession and best avoided, though not a canon violation.

Q: What was the distinction the Committee drew?

A: Between conduct that violates a canon and conduct that, while not a violation, does not conform to the general standards of the profession. It placed the emblem in the second category.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets former Texas Canon 24, which prohibited self-laudatory advertising and communications calculated to solicit business. The modern analog is ABA Model Rule 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services), which turns on whether a communication is false or misleading.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

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

See also

• TX Ethics Op. 285: "General Practice" on a Lawyer's Office Shingle
• TX Ethics Op. 305: Listing Practice Specialties on a Lawyer's Letterhead
• TX Ethics Op. 291: Academic and C.P.A. Initials on a Lawyer's Letterhead

Source

• Landing page: https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-284/
• Original PDF: https://tcle-web.s3.amazonaws.com/public/documents/Opinion_284.pdf

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION PRESENTED

The letterhead of the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York, displays the goddess of justice holding the scales of justice. May a Texas law firm's letterhead display this emblem?

18 Baylor L. Rev. 354 (1966)

ADVERTISEMENT - LETTERHEADS
The use on a lawyer's letterhead of an emblem which is not self-laudatory and which is not calculated to solicit legal work is not forbidden by any canon of ethics, but the display of the emblem is frowned upon.

Canon 24.

This question has caused the committee some concern. While Canon 24 generally prohibits an advertisement of a self-laudatory nature as well as one calculated to solicit business directly or indirectly, this addition to a letterhead does not appear to fall within the prohibition of Canon 24, and therefore the use of the emblem on the letterhead does not violate the minimum requirements of professional responsibility. At the same time, several members of the committee feel that the use of emblems of any kind is out of keeping with the dignity required of the profession and could lead to the use of more questionable emblems, and that the lawyer's professional responsibility can best be served by avoiding all use of emblems on his professional stationery. The members of this view would label the use of the emblem as improper, not in the sense that any canon is violated, but in the sense that its use does not conform to the general standards of the profession. ( 9-0. )

Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 284 (1964)