Can a lawyer leaving the Attorney General's office run a newspaper announcement that he now practices privately, specializing in the matters he handled for the State?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry asked whether it was improper for a newspaper announcement to state that an attorney who had been serving in the Attorney General's office, or with some other department of the State, is now engaged in the private practice of law specializing in enumerated matters he had handled while with the State.

The committee answered that such an announcement violates Canons 24, 39, 41, and 42. The vote was 7-0.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1947, under the former Texas Canons of Ethics, which the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct replaced effective January 1, 1990. Lawyer advertising restrictions were also reshaped by later constitutional decisions beginning with Bates v. State Bar of Arizona (1977). Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis; communications about a lawyer's services are now addressed by ABA Model Rule 7.1 and statements of fields of practice by Model Rule 7.4. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 a lawyer leaving state service announce his new private practice?

A: Not in this form. The committee held that an announcement specializing in the matters the lawyer handled while with the State was improper and violated Canons 24, 39, 41, and 42.

Q: What made the announcement objectionable?

A: The committee did not parse the canons in a long discussion; it held the announcement, which tied the new private practice to the lawyer's former state work and enumerated specialties, violated the solicitation, professional-card, and specialized-notice canons together.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets former Texas Canons 24 (solicitation), 39 (professional card), 41, and 42 (notice of specialized legal service), applied to a former state lawyer's newspaper announcement of a private practice specializing in matters handled for the State. The modern analogs are ABA Model Rule 7.1 (communications about a lawyer's services) and Model Rule 7.4 (communication of fields of practice and specialization).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services), as the modern analog
• MR 7.4 (communication of fields of practice and specialization), as the modern analog
• Texas Canons 24, 39, 41, and 42

See also

• TX Ethics Op. 14: A Departing Officeholder's Newspaper Announcement
• TX Ethics Op. 15: A Specialty-Restricted Partnership Announcement

Source

• Landing page: https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-5/
• Original PDF: https://tcle-web.s3.amazonaws.com/public/documents/Opinion_5.pdf

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION PRESENTED

Whether a newspaper announcement to the effect that an attorney theretofore serving in the Attorney General's office, or with some other department of the state, is now engaged in the private practice of law specializing in enumerated matters handled while with the state is improper.

18 Baylor L. Rev. 196 (1966)

SOLICITATION - PROFESSIONAL LISTING - NOTICE OF SPECIALIZED LEGAL SERVICE - NEWSPAPER ANNOUNCEMENT
A newspaper announcement that an attorney theretofore serving in the Attorney General's office, or with some other department of State, is now engaged in private practice specializing in enumerated matters handled while with the State, is improper.

Canons 24, 39, 41, 42.

Such an announcement violates Canons 24, 39, 41 and 42. (7-0)

Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 5 (1947)