Can a law firm that moved offices announce the new location to the public through a newspaper advertisement?

Plain-English summary

The committee was asked whether a law firm that moved office locations could notify the public of the change by publishing a newspaper advertisement, and answered yes. It relied on the United States Supreme Court's decision in Bates v. State Bar of Arizona (1977), which the committee read to permit limited, discrete, and non-misleading advertising of routine services. The committee stated that such restricted commercial speech serves both individual and societal interests in assuring informed and reliable decision making.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1978 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, including the current advertising rules (SCR 3.130 Rules 7.01 to 7.50). This opinion was issued in the immediate aftermath of Bates, and lawyer-advertising rules have changed substantially since. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 law firm announce an office move in a newspaper ad?

A: Yes. The committee concluded such an announcement is a permitted, non-misleading advertisement of routine information.

Q: What authority did the committee rely on?

A: Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, which the committee read to permit limited, discrete, and non-misleading advertising of routine services.

Background and rules framework

The opinion rests on the constitutional commercial-speech holding of Bates v. State Bar of Arizona rather than on a specific disciplinary rule, treating routine, non-misleading firm information as permissible to advertise. The modern analogs are Model Rule 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services) and Model Rule 7.2 (advertising); Kentucky's current rules appear at SCR 3.130 Rules 7.01 to 7.50.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Modern analogs Model Rule 7.1 (communications about a lawyer's services) and Model Rule 7.2 (advertising)

Cases:

• Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977)

See also

• KBA Ethics Op. E-249: Law-Firm Newspaper Announcement of New Offices
• KBA Ethics Op. E-224: Advertising a General Practice

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-183.pdf

Original opinion text

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

KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION
Ethics Opinion KBA E-183
Issued: May 1978

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 law firm which moved office locations notify the public at large of the change by publishing an advertisement in the local newspapers?

Answer:

Yes.

References:

Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 97 S.Ct. 269 (1977)
OPINION

Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 97 S.Ct. 269 (1977) permits limited, discrete and non-misleading advertising of routine services. Such restricted commercial speech serves individual and societal interests in assuring informed and reliable decision making.

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.