May a Florida firm list on its letterhead out-of-state lawyers not yet admitted in Florida, noting they are not Florida members?

Plain-English summary

A member asked whether his firm could send out announcements of additions to the firm, naming two out-of-state lawyers not yet admitted in Florida but who were soon to take the Florida Bar examination, by listing them as not admitted in Florida while showing the state of their admission.

The majority opinion was that it would be improper to list on the firm letterhead lawyers not admitted to practice in Florida, who would fall into the category of laymen or non-lawyers so far as Florida is concerned. The committee acknowledged this appeared contrary to a statement in the Bar publication "Your Privileges and Responsibilities as a Lawyer in Florida," which, under "Florida Activities by Out-of-State Lawyers," said it would be proper for a firm letterhead to show the name of an out-of-state partner with a memorandum that he was not admitted in Florida. But under the present status of the Integration Rule prohibiting practice in Florida by out-of-state lawyers, the committee believed listing such a lawyer would be improper. The committee added a caveat that the opinion did not consider an interstate partnership.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1961, before The Florida Bar's adoption of the 2006 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. The opinion applied former Canon 47 of the Canons of Professional Ethics and the Integration Rule; the unauthorized practice of law and the listing of lawyers on a firm's letterhead are now addressed by Rules 4-5.5 and 4-7.21 of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar (Model Rules 5.5 and 7.5). The rules on multijurisdictional practice and out-of-state lawyers have changed substantially since 1961. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against the current rules before relying on any specific requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Could the firm name out-of-state lawyers on its letterhead before they were admitted in Florida?

A: No, under the majority view. The committee concluded it would be improper to list lawyers not admitted in Florida, even with a note that they were not Florida members.

Q: Did the committee address out-of-state partnerships?

A: No. It expressly added a caveat that the opinion did not consider an interstate partnership.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied former Canon 47 of the Canons of Professional Ethics and the Integration Rule then prohibiting practice in Florida by out-of-state lawyers. The unauthorized practice of law and firm letterhead listings are now addressed by Rules 4-5.5 and 4-7.21 of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar (Model Rules 5.5 and 7.5). The committee noted that its conclusion ran contrary to an earlier statement in the Bar's own publication, and that the rule's status drove the result.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Canon 47 [Canons of Professional Ethics; see current Rules 4-5.5, 4-7.21]
• Integration Rule of The Florida Bar

Other authorities:

• The Florida Bar, Your Privileges and Responsibilities as a Lawyer in Florida, pp. 34, 36

See also

• FL Bar Ethics Op. 67-2: Out-of-State Office on a Partnership Letterhead

Source

• Landing page: https://www.floridabar.org/etopinions/etopinion-61-14/
• Original PDF: https://www-media.floridabar.org/uploads/2017/04/FL-Bar-Ethics-Op-61-14-2.pdf

Original opinion text

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

FLORIDA BAR ETHICS OPINION
OPINION 61-14
September 12, 1961
Advisory ethics opinions are not binding.
The Integration Rule prohibits a lawyer not a member of The Florida Bar from holding himself out as a practitioner. Thus a law firm may not name such a lawyer on its letterhead even though noting the lawyer is not a member of The Florida Bar.
Caveat: This opinion does not consider an interstate partnership.
Canon: 47 [See current 4-5.5]
Chairman Holcomb stated the opinion of the committee:
A member of The Florida Bar submits an inquiry as to whether or not it would be proper for his firm to send out announcements of additions to the firm, giving the names of two out-of-state lawyers not admitted to practice in Florida at present but who are taking the Florida Bar examination in a short time. The question is whether it would be possible to list these individuals as not admitted in Florida but showing the state of their admission.
The majority opinion is that it would be improper to list on the firm letterhead lawyers not admitted to practice in Florida, and they would therefore fall into the category of laymen or non-lawyers, so far as Florida is concerned. This appears to be contrary to the statement contained in "Your Privileges and Responsibilities as a Lawyer in Florida" under the heading on page 34 of "Florida Activities by Out-of-State Lawyers," where on page 36 it is stated that it would be proper and ethical for a firm letterhead to show the name of an out-of-state partner accompanied by a memorandum that he was not admitted to practice in Florida. However, under the present status of the Integration Rule prohibiting practice in Florida by out-of-state lawyers, we believe that the listing of an out-of-state lawyer not admitted to practice in Florida would be improper.