How does Washington treat firm names, letterhead, and a Washington firm's association with law firms in other states?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1987. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current rules of professional conduct in your state, with citations.
Plain-English summary
The inquiry concerned firm names, letterhead, and a firm's association with law firms in other states. In reviewing the matter, the committee became aware of American Bar Association Formal Opinion 84-351 and adopted that opinion.
The committee's statement is a single sentence; it does not restate the ABA opinion's reasoning or conclusions. For the substance, the controlling text is ABA Formal Opinion 84-351 itself.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1987, before the 2006 revisions to the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct. The committee adopted an ABA opinion from 1984; both predate the current firm-name and letterhead rules (the topic now sits under Model Rule 7.5 and its state counterparts). Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific point.
Common questions
Q: Did the WSBA committee write its own analysis of firm names and out-of-state associations?
A: No. The committee stated that, in reviewing the matter, it became aware of ABA Formal Opinion 84-351 and adopted that opinion.
Q: Where is the actual guidance the committee adopted?
A: In ABA Formal Opinion 84-351. This page reflects only that the committee adopted that ABA opinion on firm names, letterhead, and association with law firms in other states; it does not reproduce the ABA opinion's content.
Background and rules framework
The committee resolved the inquiry by adoption rather than by applying a numbered Washington rule, and it cited no RPC. The subject (firm names, letterhead, and a firm's association with law firms in other states) is the territory now governed by Model Rule 7.5 and its state counterparts, but the opinion itself rests entirely on ABA Formal Opinion 84-351.
Citations and references
The opinion cites no rule of professional conduct, statute, or case.
Other opinions cited:
- ABA Formal Opinion 84-351: firm names, letterhead, and association with law firms in other states (adopted by the committee).
See also
- WSBA Ethics Op. 1015: listing an out-of-state lawyer as an "associated office" on letterhead
- WSBA Ethics Op. 1005: a firm name that includes a non-partner associate
- ABA Formal Op. 94-388: relationships among law firms
Source
- Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=187
Original opinion text
Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.
Advisory Opinion: 1076
Year Issued: 1987
RPC(s): ABA Formal Opinion 84-351
Subject: Firm names; letterhead; association with law firms in other states
In reviewing this matter, the Committee became aware of the American Bar Association Formal Opinion 84-351, and adopted that opinion.
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 1987 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.