Can a Washington sole practitioner call the firm a 'Law Group' when only one licensed lawyer practices there?

Plain-English summary

The inquirer, an attorney in solo practice, wanted to do business as "XXX Law Group, PLLC" and asked whether that would violate RPC 7.1, 7.4, or 7.5(d) under two conditions: when he employs nonlawyer legal assistants, and when he does not. The underlying question was whether a firm name implying that more than one person, or more than one lawyer, practices under the "law group" umbrella raises an ethical problem.

The committee explained that RPC 7.5 governs the use of firm names, that RPC 7.5(d) prohibits a firm name stating or implying practice in a partnership "or other organization" unless that is a fact, and that RPC 7.5(a) incorporates the prohibitions against false or misleading communications about the lawyer or the lawyer's services (RPC 7.1) and against certain communications about fields of practice (RPC 7.4). It concluded that use of the word "group" in a firm name, where the firm consists of only one licensed attorney, would violate RPC 7.5(a) and (d), whether or not the firm also employs nonlawyer staff.

In practice

Under this opinion, and under the firm-name rules as they stood in 2006, the controlling fact is the number of licensed lawyers, not the presence of nonlawyer staff. The opinion holds that a one-lawyer firm using "group" in its name violates RPC 7.5(a) and (d) because the term implies more than one lawyer practices there. The committee reached the same result whether or not the solo employs nonlawyer assistants, so adding support staff does not make a "group" name accurate. Washington restructured RPC 7.1 through 7.5 in a comprehensive 2006 revision, so the current rule numbering should be checked.

Common questions

Q: Can a Washington solo practitioner call the firm a "Law Group"?

A: No. The committee concluded that using "group" where only one licensed attorney practices violates RPC 7.5(a) and (d) because it implies more than one lawyer.

Q: Does employing nonlawyer assistants make a "Law Group" name acceptable?

A: No. The committee said the result is the same whether or not the firm employs nonlawyer staff, because the term implies more than one lawyer, not merely more than one person.

Q: Why is "group" treated as misleading?

A: RPC 7.5(d) permits a name implying a partnership or other organization only when that is a fact, and RPC 7.5(a) incorporates RPC 7.1's bar on false or misleading communications. The committee found a one-lawyer "group" implies a multi-lawyer organization that does not exist.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Washington RPC 7.5 (firm names and letterheads; the counterpart to Model Rule 7.5), particularly RPC 7.5(d) (stating or implying a partnership or other organization only when it is a fact) and RPC 7.5(a) (incorporating RPC 7.1's prohibition on false or misleading communications and RPC 7.4 on communications about fields of practice).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Model Rule 7.5 / Washington RPC 7.5, 7.5(a), 7.5(d) (firm names; implying a partnership or organization only when true)
• Model Rule 7.1 / Washington RPC 7.1 (false or misleading communications); Washington RPC 7.4 (communications about fields of practice)

See also

• WSBA Ethics Op. 2113: 'Honorary Member' on Letterhead
• WA Ethics Op. 1086: Solo Using 'Associates'
• WA Ethics Op. 1005: Non-Partner in the Firm Name

Source

• Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=1565

Original opinion text

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

Advisory Opinion: 2121
Year Issued: 2006
RPC(s): RPC 7.1, 7.4, & 7.5
Subject: May a sole practitioner use the phrase "Law Group" in the name of his or her firm?

The inquirer is an attorney who wishes to do business as the “XXX Law Group, PLLC,” in solo practice and wants to know whether doing so would violate RPC 7.1, 7.4 or 7.5(d) under either of two conditions: (1) in solo practice, he does employ non-lawyer legal assistants, and (2) in solo practice, he does not employ non-lawyer assistants.

The question asked is whether there are ethical problems with a firm name that implies or potentially implies that more than one person, or more than one lawyer, practices under the umbrella of the “law group”.

RPC 7.5 governs the use of firm names by lawyers. RPC 7.5(d) prohibits lawyers from using a firm name that states or implies that they practice in a partnership “or other organization” unless “that is a fact.” RPC 7.5(a) incorporates the prohibitions against false or misleading communications regarding the lawyer or the lawyer’s services (RPC 7.1) and the prohibition against certain forms of communication about the lawyer’s fields of practice (RPC 7.4).

The committee believes that use of the word “group” in the firm’s name, where the firm consists of only one licensed attorney, would violate RPC 7.5 (a) and (d), whether or not the firm also employs non-lawyer staff.