Can a licensed Arkansas architect operating as a sole proprietor use a business name with their name?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 2017. Ezel answers yours: what it means for your facts, under current Arkansas law, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Senator Bart Hester asked whether a licensed Arkansas architect operating as a sole proprietor could use additional words, taglines, or a business name alongside the architect's own name. The question turned on Ark. Code Ann. §§ 17-15-301 and 17-15-303, the parts of the Arkansas Architectural Act that govern who can call themselves an architect and how.
The AG declined to answer. The reason was procedural, not substantive. The AG's office has a long-standing policy of not issuing opinions on matters that are already the subject of specific administrative determinations. Although the senator's question was framed in general terms, the AG noted that the law at issue had been the subject of a recent order from the Arkansas State Board of Architects, Landscape Architects, and Interior Designers in a particular case.
When a state board issues an order on a question of statutory interpretation, that order is quasi-judicial. The Arkansas Administrative Procedure Act, at Ark. Code Ann. § 25-15-212, provides for judicial review of such orders by appeal to circuit court. Issuing an AG opinion that effectively second-guessed the Board's order, even framed abstractly, would interfere with the regular machinery of administrative review. So the AG sent the question to the courts.
This kind of decline-to-opine is not unusual when the AG's office sees the silhouette of a specific party fight behind an opinion request. The AG is supposed to issue advice on questions of state law, not weigh in on disputes that already have a regulator and a court of review.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 2017. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
Background and statutory framework
Two statutory frameworks intersect in this opinion.
The Arkansas Architectural Act (Ark. Code Ann. § 17-15-101 et seq.) governs the licensing and practice of architects. Section 17-15-301 prohibits unlicensed practice and use of titles. Section 17-15-303 covers misrepresentation and trade-name issues. The Arkansas State Board of Architects, Landscape Architects, and Interior Designers enforces those provisions.
The Arkansas Administrative Procedure Act (Ark. Code Ann. § 25-15-201 et seq.) governs how state boards make decisions and how those decisions get reviewed. Section 25-15-212 provides for circuit-court appeal of final agency orders. That appeal is the prescribed channel for any party who thinks the Board got the law wrong.
The AG's policy against issuing opinions on matters that are subject to specific administrative determinations exists to keep these lanes separate. If a licensee disagrees with how a board read a statute in their case, the remedy is judicial review, not a competing AG opinion that the licensee could wave at the next agency proceeding.
Common questions
Why didn't the AG answer the question?
Because the underlying issue had already been decided by the Board of Architects in a specific case. The AG's office has a policy of not opining on matters that are the subject of specific administrative determinations. The proper avenue for review is judicial appeal under the APA, not an AG opinion.
What's a "quasi-judicial" board decision?
An order issued by a state agency or board after a hearing that resolves a specific party's case under the agency's governing statute. It functions like a court ruling within the agency's jurisdiction, with judicial review available through the Administrative Procedure Act.
How would a licensee contest the Board's order?
Under Ark. Code Ann. § 25-15-212, by appealing to circuit court within the time and procedural rules of the APA. The appeal is on the existing record (with limited exceptions) and is reviewed for legal error and substantial evidence.
Could the AG be asked again about this issue once the appeal is over?
Possibly, depending on how the courts ruled and whether a different question is presented. But while a specific case is alive in the administrative or judicial pipeline, the AG's office is unlikely to wade in.
Did the AG signal a view on the merits?
No. The opinion is purely procedural. It does not say whether sole proprietor architects can or cannot use additional words or business names alongside their own names. That answer comes from the Board's order and any judicial review.
Source
Original opinion text
Opinion No. 2017-074
November 1, 2017
The Honorable Bart Hester
State Senator
Post Office Box 85
Cave Springs, AR 72718
Dear Senator Hester:
STATE OF ARKANSAS
ATTORNEY GENERAL
LESLIE RUTLEDGE
This is in response to your request for an official Attorney General opinion on the following questions concerning a licensed architect's use of a business name or tagline in conjunction with his own name:
1) Under Arkansas's law, is a licensed architect who is a sole proprietor allowed to use additional phrases, words or a business name in conjunction with their name?
2) Is it a violation of the Arkansas Architectural Act, specifically Ark. Code Ann. §§ 17-15-301 and 17-15-303, for an individual duly licensed as an architect in the State of Arkansas and a sole proprietorship to use any additional phrase, tagline, working, or business name in conjunction with his name in the practice of architecture?
RESPONSE
I must respectfully decline to address these questions in light of this office's long-standing policy against issuing opinions on matters that are the subject of specific administrative determinations. Although your opinion request does not reference any particular licensee, it has come to my attention that the specific law at issue in your questions was the subject of an order issued by the Arkansas State Board of Architects, Landscape Architects, and Interior Designers ("Board") in a specific case.
The Board addressed the scope of this law in deciding the particular matter before it. This administrative determination is quasi-judicial in nature, which puts it outside the scope of an Attorney General's opinion pursuant to the office's long-standing policy. The Arkansas Administrative Procedure Act grants a right to appeal the Board's determination to circuit court. Judicial review is therefore the proper avenue to resolve these questions relating to the Board's decision.
Sincerely,
LESLIE RUTLEDGE
Attorney General
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 2017 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Arkansas statutes and case law and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the law it relies on.