Can a district attorney use his official government stationery when handling his own private civil cases?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1971. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current Texas Rules of Professional Conduct, with citations.
Plain-English summary
The Committee was asked whether it is ethical for a district attorney to use his official stationery in his personal civil practice of law.
The Committee concluded that a district attorney should not do so. It reasoned that the use of official stationery in a private civil practice would be misleading and self-laudatory, which is prohibited by Canon 24, and it cited Canons 24 and 39 along with prior Opinions 267, 291, and 198.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1971, 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 misleading communications were not affected. Misleading communications about a lawyer's services are now governed by Texas Rule 7.01 and ABA Model Rule 7.1, and misconduct generally by Texas Rule 8.04 and Model Rule 8.4. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: May a district attorney use official stationery for his private civil cases?
A: No. The Committee concluded that a district attorney should not use his official stationery in his personal civil practice.
Q: Why is it improper?
A: The Committee reasoned that using official stationery in a private civil practice would be misleading and self-laudatory, which Canon 24 prohibits.
Q: What authority did the Committee cite?
A: It cited Canons 24 and 39 and prior Opinions 267, 291, and 198.
Background and rules framework
The opinion interprets former Texas Canon 24 (barring misleading and self-laudatory communications) together with Canon 39. The modern analogs are Texas Rule 7.01 and ABA Model Rule 7.1 (misleading communications about a lawyer's services) and Texas Rule 8.04 and Model Rule 8.4 (misconduct).
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- MR 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services), as the modern analog
- MR 8.4 (misconduct), as the modern analog
- Texas Canons 24 and 39 (former Texas Canons of Ethics)
Other opinions cited:
- Texas Ethics Opinions 267, 291, 198
See also
- TX Ethics Op. 357: Whether a Neon Law-Office Sign Violates the Canons
- TX Ethics Op. 385: Office and Building Signs for Lawyers
- TX Ethics Op. 370: Local Bar Roster Listing Members' Fields of Practice
Source
- Landing page: https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-356/
- Original PDF: https://tcle-web.s3.amazonaws.com/public/documents/Opinion_356.pdf
Original opinion text
Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.
QUESTION PRESENTED
Is it ethical for a District Attorney to use his official stationery in his personal civil practice of law?
23 Baylor L. Rev. 897 (1972)
PUBLIC OFFICIAL STATIONERY USED IN PERSONAL CIVIL PRACTICE
A District Attorney should not use his official stationery in his personal civil practice. Canons 24, 39
The use of such official stationery in private civil practice would be misleading and self- laudatory which is prohibited by Canon 24. See Opinions 267, 291 and 198.
Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 356 (1971)
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 1971 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.