May a lawyer be identified as 'international counsel,' and does the arrangement with an out-of-state-admitted lawyer raise unauthorized-practice concerns?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1989. 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 identifying a lawyer as "international counsel" and an arrangement involving a lawyer admitted only in another state. The committee was of the opinion that the "international counsel" designation would violate RPC 7.4 because it would imply that the lawyer was a specialist.
The committee also discussed whether the professional arrangement described (involving a lawyer admitted only in another state) would violate RPC 5.5 regarding aiding the unauthorized practice of law. It rendered no opinion on that question, but suggested that the rule be called to the inquirer's attention so the propriety of the proposed conduct could be reviewed.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1989, before the Washington State Bar Association's adoption of the 2006 revisions to the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 be described as "international counsel"?
A: Under this 1989 opinion, no. The committee concluded the title would violate RPC 7.4 because it implies the lawyer is a specialist.
Q: Did the committee decide the unauthorized-practice question?
A: No. It raised RPC 5.5 in connection with a lawyer admitted only in another state but rendered no opinion, suggesting the rule be reviewed.
Q: Why does "international counsel" raise a problem?
A: Because, in the committee's view, the term implies specialization, which RPC 7.4 restricts.
Background and rules framework
RPC 7.4, Washington's version of ABA Model Rule 7.4, governs how a lawyer may communicate fields of practice and restricts holding oneself out as a specialist. The committee read "international counsel" as implying specialization and therefore as a violation. RPC 5.5, corresponding to ABA Model Rule 5.5, prohibits assisting the unauthorized practice of law; the committee flagged it as relevant to an arrangement with a lawyer admitted only in another state but expressly declined to opine.
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- ABA Model Rule 7.4 (communication of fields of practice and specialization)
- ABA Model Rule 5.5 (unauthorized practice of law)
- Washington RPC 7.4; RPC 5.5
See also
No sibling opinions yet indexed.
Source
- Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=357
Original opinion text
Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.
The Committee was of the opinion that the identification of a lawyer as "international counsel" would violate RPC 7.4 as it would imply that that lawyer was a specialist. The Committee also discussed whether the professional arrangement as outlined in your letter regarding this lawyer who was admitted only in another state would violate RPC 5.5 regarding aiding the unauthorized practice of law, but rendered no opinion on that question and suggested that this rule be called to your attention so you could review the propriety of your proposed conduct.
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 1989 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.