Can a lawyer who is also a CPA run a law practice and an accounting practice from the same office, sharing a receptionist, clerical worker, and reception area?

Plain-English summary

Attorney A was both a licensed Illinois attorney and a CPA, practicing law as a sole practitioner with an associate and accounting in a partnership with a non-lawyer CPA. The two practices used separate stationery and files but shared a receptionist, a clerical worker, and a common reception area. A asked whether he could conduct both practices at once, share that staff and space, and operate both from the same office.

The committee answered the first three questions affirmatively, calling it a marked departure from prior opinions. Effective July 1, 1984, the Illinois Supreme Court repealed former Rule 2-102(c), which had barred a lawyer engaged in both law and another profession from indicating it on letterhead or identifying himself as a lawyer in connection with the other business. Earlier opinions (862, 807, 796, 765) had amplified those constraints to limit dual-profession practice from one office; with the rule repealed, the foundation for that prohibition was eliminated. The committee noted there had never been a bar on dual occupations as such; the ethical questions concerned intermingling the occupations and potential conflicts.

The committee answered the sharing question (Question 2) affirmatively as well, but tied to its response to Question 4. On guidelines, given the breadth of the request, it declined a detailed response and instead directed attention to former Rule 2-103 (referrals and solicitation), Rule 3-102 (division of fees with a non-lawyer), Rule 4-101 (confidences), Rules 5-101, 104, 105, and 107 (independent professional judgment), and Canon 9 (appearance of impropriety).

Currency note

This opinion was issued in October 1985, under the former Illinois Code of Professional Responsibility and before Illinois adopted the 1990 (and later 2010) Rules of Professional Conduct. The ISBA Board of Governors affirmed the opinion in July 2010 as generally consistent with the 2010 Rules (Rules 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 5.4, 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, and 7.4), while cautioning that the specific standards referenced may differ from the 2010 Rules. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer-CPA run both practices from the same office?

A: The opinion concluded yes; after the 1984 repeal of former Rule 2-102(c), the basis for the prior prohibition on practicing dual professions from one office was eliminated.

Q: Can the two practices share a receptionist, clerical worker, and reception area?

A: Per the opinion, yes, but subject to the committee's guidance pointing to the rules on solicitation, fee division with non-lawyers, confidentiality, independent judgment, and the appearance of impropriety.

Q: What rules still govern the combined practice?

A: The committee directed attention to former Rules 2-103, 3-102, 4-101, 5-101/104/105/107, and Canon 9, covering referrals, fee division with non-lawyers, confidences, independent judgment, and appearance of impropriety.

Background and rules framework

The opinion turned on the July 1, 1984 repeal of former Illinois Code Rule 2-102(c) (dual-practice publicity restriction), and pointed to the Code's provisions on independence, confidentiality, conflicts, and fee division with non-lawyers. The Board's 2010 affirmation maps the analysis to current Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 5.4, 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, and 7.4, corresponding to the ABA Model Rules on confidentiality, conflicts, professional independence, and communications about services.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Former Illinois Code Rule 2-102(c) (repealed July 1, 1984; dual-practice publicity)
• Former Illinois Code Rules 2-103, 3-102, 4-101, 5-101/104/105/107, Canon 9 (cited for guidance)
• Illinois RPC 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 5.4, 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, 7.4 (2010 equivalents per the Board's affirmation)
• MR 5.4 (professional independence); MR 1.7 (conflicts); MR 7.1 (communications about services)

Other opinions cited:

• ISBA Opinions 862, 807, 796, 765: dual-profession practice and publicity under the former rule

See also

• ISBA Ethics Op. 90-16: Non-Legal Business in the Office
• ISBA Ethics Op. 86-08: Client Typing on Firm Letterhead
• ISBA Ethics Op. 87-02: Broker Hiring a Lawyer for Seller

Source

• Landing page: https://www.isba.org/ethics/opinions/8503