Can a law firm's full-time investigator put the firm's name on his business card?

Plain-English summary

A Florida lawyer who employed an investigator wanted to give him a business card showing his name and the word "Investigator" with a street address, with no indication that the address was a law office. The committee found no impropriety in the proposed card, assuming the investigator was a full-time employee working for no one else and that his activity was duly and ethically the kind that may be handled by a law assistant.

The committee then noted, "as a matter of interest," that the ABA had addressed similar questions in Informal Opinions 881 (1965), 909 (1966), and 1185 (1971), which determined that a firm does not necessarily violate ethical principles by letting an investigator-employee use a card bearing his name and position together with the firm's name, address, and telephone number; under those opinions the firm remains accountable for the lay assistant's conduct and must ensure his activities do not result in, or even appear to result in, advertising or solicitation for the firm. A majority of the Florida committee adopted the ABA view. A minority found that using the firm's name on the card was improper, while agreeing the card could carry the address and telephone number.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1971, before The Florida Bar's adoption of the 2006 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. It applied the former Code and ABA informal opinions, the subject matter of which is now addressed by Rule 4-7.21 (firm names and letterheads) and Rule 4-5.3 (responsibilities regarding nonlawyer assistants). Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 investigator's card include the law firm's name?

A: Under this opinion, a majority adopted the ABA view permitting the firm's name on the card, so long as the firm ensured the investigator's activities did not become, or appear to become, advertising or solicitation. A minority would have barred the firm name while allowing the address and phone number.

Q: What conditions did the committee attach?

A: The opinion assumed the investigator was a full-time employee working for no one else and that his activity was the kind a law assistant may ethically handle, and it stressed that the firm remained accountable for the lay assistant's conduct.

Background and rules framework

The opinion addressed how a law firm's nonlawyer employee may identify himself and the firm on a business card. In current Florida practice, firm names and letterheads are governed by Rule 4-7.21, and a lawyer's responsibility for the conduct of nonlawyer assistants is governed by Rule 4-5.3. The Model Rule analogues are Rules 7.5 and 5.3.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Former Code of Professional Responsibility generally [subject matter now in Rules 4-7.21 and 4-5.3]

Other opinions cited:

• ABA Informal Opinions 881 (1965), 909 (1966), and 1185 (1971)

See also

• FL Bar Ethics Op. 71-66: A Lay Company's Name on the Window
• FL Bar Ethics Op. 71-49: Withdrawing Partner, Of Counsel
• FL Bar Ethics Op. 72-29: Non-Florida Lawyer on Letterhead

Source

• Landing page: https://www.floridabar.org/etopinions/etopinion-71-39/
• Original PDF: https://www-media.floridabar.org/uploads/2017/04/FL-Bar-Ethics-Op-71-39-3.pdf

Original opinion text

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

FLORIDA BAR ETHICS OPINION
OPINION 71-39
October 20, 1971
Advisory ethics opinions are not binding.
An investigator employed full time by a law firm may use the law firm's name on his business card.
Opinions: ABA Informals 881 (1965), 909 (1966), 1185 (1971)
RPC: [See current 4-7.21]
Committeeman Massey stated the opinion of the committee:
A member of The Florida Bar employs an investigator. He desires to have a card imprinted as follows:
NAME

INVESTIGATOR
Street and Number
City, State, Zip
There will be no indication that the address is one of a law office.
The Committee finds there is no impropriety in the proposed action, assuming the investigator is a full-time employee working for no one else. The Committee further assumes the activity of the investigator is that duly and ethically allowed to be handled by a law assistant.
As a matter of interest, the ABA has considered similar questions in informal opinions 881 (1965), 909 (1966) and 1185 (1971). The ABA opinions determine a law firm does not necessarily violate ethical principles by permitting an investigator, also an employee, to use a business card bearing his name and position and additionally the law firm's name, address and telephone number. The ABA committee determined the firm would be accountable for the lay assistant's actions and conduct and would have to ensure the investigator's activities did not result in advertising or solicitation in behalf of the law firm, or even appear to do so.
A majority of this Committee would adopt the view expressed by the ABA. A minority finds the use of the law firm's name on the card to be improper, but do agree to the use of the card with address and telephone number thereon.