Can a law firm list its legal assistants or paralegals on the firm's letterhead?

Plain-English summary

Opinion E-85-6 asked whether an attorney may list legal assistants on the firm's letterhead. The committee acknowledged that its earlier Formal Opinion E-75-22 had concluded it would be improper to list legal assistants or paralegals on law firm letterhead. In light of former SCR 20.08(7), which provides that a lawyer may advertise the lawyer's availability to provide legal services except through advertising that is false, misleading, deceptive, or unfair, the committee concluded a lawyer may list legal assistants on the letterhead. It reasoned that whether a lawyer employs legal assistants is relevant to the lawyer's availability to provide legal services, citing In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Marcus & Tepper and Bates v. State Bar of Arizona. The committee held that, so long as SCR 20.08(7) is complied with, a lawyer may properly list legal assistants on letterhead, and that anything to the contrary in Formal Opinion E-75-22 is no longer of force or effect.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1985, before Wisconsin's July 1, 2007 adoption of the revised Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys (the state's Ethics 2000 update), and it analyzes conduct under the former Code. Communications about a lawyer's services and letterhead are now governed by SCR 20:7.1 / Model Rule 7.1 (and the former firm-name/letterhead rule Model Rule 7.5). 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 firm put its paralegals or legal assistants on the letterhead?

A: The committee concluded yes, so long as the listing is not false, misleading, deceptive, or unfair.

Q: Didn't an earlier Wisconsin opinion say no?

A: Yes. The committee acknowledged its earlier Formal Opinion E-75-22 had barred the practice and expressly held that anything contrary in that opinion is no longer of force or effect.

Q: Why is listing legal assistants permitted?

A: The committee reasoned that whether a lawyer employs legal assistants is relevant to the lawyer's availability to provide legal services, which the advertising rule permits a lawyer to communicate.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interpreted the former Code's advertising provision (SCR 20.08(7)), which permits truthful communication of a lawyer's availability to provide legal services, against the backdrop of Bates v. State Bar of Arizona. Communications about a lawyer's services and firm letterhead are now governed by SCR 20:7.1 / Model Rule 7.1 and the former Model Rule 7.5 on firm names and letterheads.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Wis. SCR 20.08(7) / Model Rule 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services); Model Rule 7.5 (firm names and letterheads) (former Code provision)

Cases:

• In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceedings Against Marcus & Tepper, 107 Wis. 2d 560, 320 N.W.2d 806 (1982)
• Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977)

Other opinions cited:

• Wisconsin Formal Op. E-75-22 (overruled)

See also

• WI Ethics Op. E-90-1: Law Firm Names for Independent Lawyers
• WI Ethics Op. E-88-1: Law Degrees on an Accountant's Business Card
• WI Ethics Op. E-95-3: Paralegal Attending a Real Estate Closing

Source

• Landing page: https://www.wisbar.org/formembers/ethics/pages/formal-opinions.aspx
• Original PDF: https://www.wisbar.org/formembers/ethics/Ethics%20Opinions/E-85-6.pdf