Can a lawyer who is also a title-insurance agent hand out earnest-money contract forms branded with the title company and his name as agent?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1964. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current Texas Rules of Professional Conduct, with citations.
Plain-English summary
A licensed practicing attorney was also an agent for a title-insurance company in the town where he kept his law offices. To advertise his title-insurance business, he proposed to print and distribute to real estate agents earnest-money contract forms carrying a legend in the upper right corner stating that the form was furnished courtesy of the title company, naming him as its agent with his phone number, and advising that anyone wishing to use it should consult an attorney. Because the legend did not state that he was an attorney, the question was whether distributing the forms violated the canons on advertising by an attorney.
The Committee answered yes: Canon 24 was violated. It cited Opinions 62, 79, 134, and 221, and distinguished Opinions 91, 114, and 119 on the ground that they involved businesses not so directly and generally identified with legal work as the title-insurance business. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Can a lawyer who runs a related business advertise it on forms he distributes?
A: On these facts the Committee said no. Distributing earnest-money forms branded with the title company and the lawyer's name as its agent violated Canon 24, even though the legend did not call him an attorney.
Q: Did it matter that the form did not identify him as a lawyer?
A: The Committee still found a Canon 24 violation. It treated the title-insurance business as so directly and generally identified with legal work that advertising it this way reached the lawyer's professional standing.
Q: Why did the Committee distinguish its earlier opinions?
A: It said Opinions 91, 114, and 119 involved businesses not so closely identified with legal work as title insurance, so they did not control here.
Background and rules framework
The opinion interprets former Texas Canon 24, which barred direct and indirect advertising by lawyers. The modern analogs are ABA Model Rule 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services) and Model Rule 7.2 (advertising).
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- MR 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services), as the modern analog
- MR 7.2 (advertising), as the modern analog
- Texas Canon 24 (former canon)
Other opinions cited:
- Texas Opinions 62, 79, 134, and 221: relied on for the violation
- Texas Opinions 91, 114, and 119: distinguished as involving businesses less identified with legal work
See also
- TX Ethics Op. 291: Academic and C.P.A. Initials on a Lawyer's Letterhead
- TX Ethics Op. 300: Adoption Agency Circular Naming Its Attorney
- TX Ethics Op. 305: Listing Practice Specialties on a Lawyer's Letterhead
Source
- Landing page: https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-290/
- Original PDF: https://tcle-web.s3.amazonaws.com/public/documents/Opinion_290.pdf
Original opinion text
Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.
QUESTION PRESENTED
Joe Blow, a duly licensed and practicing attorney, is an agent for the Good Deal Title Insurance Company, writing policies of title insurance in the town where he maintains his law offices. As a means of advertising his title insurance business, Joe decides to print and distribute to various real estate agents forms of an Earnest Money Contract, with the following appearing in the upper right hand corner of the contract:
"This form is furnished by courtesy of Good Deal Title Insurance Company, Joe Blow, Agent, Slippery Rock, Texas. Telephone PL 0-0000. Anyone desiring to use it should consult his attorney."
Since the above does not reflect that Joe Blow is an attorney, does the distribution and use of these forms constitute a violation of the Canons of Ethics with respect to advertising by an attorney?
18 Baylor L. Rev. 360 (1966)
SOLICITATION - ADVERTISING A TITLE INSURANCE BUSINESS
A practicing lawyer, X, who is also local agent of a title insurance company may not distribute to real estate agents printed forms of an earnest money contract having printed on it the legend that it is furnished by the title insurance company and that X is its agent.
Yes, Canon 24 is violated; see Opinions 62, 79, 134 and 221. Opinions 91, 114 and 119 can be distinguished on the ground that they pertain to businesses not so directly and generally identified with legal work as is the title insurance business. Also cf. opinion 196. (9-0.)
Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 290 (1964)
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 1964 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Texas Rules of Professional Conduct and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.