Can a law firm's letterhead name a partner as the 'supervising partner' of a branch office, along with the branch address and resident associate?

Plain-English summary

The committee considered whether a Kentucky law firm with a branch office in another city, staffed by one resident associate, could list on its letterhead, beneath the branch address, the name of a senior partner designated as supervising partner of that office. The designated partner would be directly responsible for the branch's operation, supervise its accounting and work flow, visit periodically, and advise the associate. The committee answered yes.

The committee applied DR 2-102(4), which specifies the information that may appear on a letterhead, including the name of an attorney, his addresses and telephone numbers, and the name of his firm and any associates. From that, it reasoned, a letterhead may reference a branch office and list the names of members practicing from it, and where the office is under the direction of a particular partner there is no reason that fact may not also be indicated.

The committee found the designation was not calculated to accomplish any end prohibited by the Canons. Its only purpose was to help those dealing with the firm identify the individual responsible for supervising the branch, and to distinguish him from partners not active in the branch's daily operation. It therefore held the designation ethically permissible.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1975 under Kentucky's former Code of Professional Responsibility (in effect 1971 to 1990), before the Kentucky Bar Association's 1990 adoption of the Rules of Professional Conduct (SCR 3.130) and the substantial 2009 revisions to those rules. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against the current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a firm letterhead name the partner who supervises a branch office?

A: Yes. The committee held that DR 2-102(4) permits listing firm members, and indicating which partner directs a branch is permissible because it is not aimed at any end prohibited by the Canons.

Q: Why did the committee allow the "supervising partner" label?

A: Because its only purpose was to let those dealing with the firm know who is responsible for the branch, and to distinguish that partner from others not active in its daily operation.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied DR 2-102 of the former Code of Professional Responsibility (permissible content of professional letterheads and similar communications). The modern analogs are Model Rule 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services) and Model Rule 7.5 (firm names and letterheads).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• DR 2-102 (information permitted on a letterhead); modern analogs Model Rules 7.1 and 7.5

See also

• KBA Ethics Op. E-138: Public Office Title on Private-Practice Letterhead
• KBA Ethics Op. E-158: Nonlawyer Staff Names and Titles on Firm Letterhead
• KBA Ethics Op. E-161: News Story and Photo Announcing a New Lawyer

Source

• Landing page: https://kybar.org/For-Members/Rules-Ethics-Information/Ethics-Opinions
• Original PDF: https://kybar.org/Portals/0/Admin/Ethics%20Opinions/KBA_E-114.pdf

Original opinion text

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

KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION
Ethics Opinion KBA E-114
Issued: May 1975

This opinion was decided under the Code of Professional Responsibility, which was in effect from 1971 to 1990. Lawyers should consult the current version of the Rules of Professional Conduct and Comments, SCR 3.130 (available at http://www.kybar.org), especially Rules 7.01-7.50 and the Attorneys' Advertising Commission Regulations, before relying on this opinion.

Question:

May a firm maintaining a branch office in another city list on its letterhead, in addition to the location of the branch and name of the resident associate, the name of a member designated as "supervising partner" of that office?

Answer:

Yes.

References:

DR 2-102(4)

OPINION

A Kentucky law firm has a branch office in another city manned by one "resident associate." Recently, because of increased business in that office the firm has discussed the possibility of naming one of the senior partners as a "supervising partner", so that one person in the firm would be directly responsible for the operation of the branch office. In addition to supervising the accounting and work flow of the branch, the person so designated would also visit that office on a periodic basis and advise the associate in the conduct of the office. In making this change, the firm wishes to list as "supervising partner" on its letterhead, beneath the address of the branch, the partner so designated. Before taking that step, the firm has requested approval of this Committee.

DR 2-102(4) specifies information that may be included on a letterhead, including among other things the name of an attorney, his addresses and telephone numbers, the name of his firm and any associates. From this, clearly a letterhead may make reference to a branch office of a firm and list thereunder the names of all members practicing from that office. Where the office is under the direction of a particular partner, we see no reason why that fact may not also be indicated on the letterhead. It is not calculated to accomplish any end prohibited by the Canons. The only purpose is to assist those dealing with the firm in knowing the identity of the individual within the firm responsible for supervision of the activities of the branch. It also distinguishes him from other partners not active in daily operation of the branch. We therefore hold that such designation is ethically permissible.

Note to Reader

This ethics opinion has been formally adopted by the Board of Governors of the Kentucky Bar Association under the provisions of Kentucky Supreme Court Rule 3.530 (or its predecessor rule). The Rule provides that formal opinions are advisory only.