Can lawyers who only share office space call themselves 'A, B, C & D, a Professional Association'?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1985. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct, with citations.
Plain-English summary
A group of lawyers who shared the expense of office space, a secretary, and an associate, but did not share fees and were not partners, asked whether they could practice as "A, B, C & D, a Professional Association" and use stationery listing their names in a left-hand column. The committee said the question was not the substantive-law issue of whether practicing under that style could expose them to partnership liability, which is outside its jurisdiction, but whether the name is deceptive under DR 2-101(A) and DR 2-102(A), which bar deceptive statements in advertising and professional notices.
The committee recalled its Opinion 76-19, which (quoting ABA Opinion 310) had described how non-partners could publicize themselves without implying a partnership: separate stationery, no joining of names on cards or in directories, and at most a shared door sign listing the individuals. The present inquiry asked whether adding "a Professional Association" to joined, partnership-style names would meet that concern. The committee noted that "professional association," unlike "partnership," has no accepted legal meaning and could describe many forms of organization, and that from 1972 to 1979 the rules (DR 2-102(B), copied from the ABA Model Code) had referred to "P.A." as a permissible designation, with no legislative history explaining the term. It observed that committees in other states had not treated "a professional association" following a partnership-style name as a permissible way to avoid the partnership implication.
The 1979 amendments replaced the detailed firm-name rules with a single "deceptive statement or claim" standard. Given the uncertain legal meaning of "professional association," the committee was quite doubtful that the words avoid the implication of a partnership or partnership-like arrangement created by the form "A, B, C & D." Even so, given the former reference to such terminology in the rules and its widespread use by Massachusetts firms, the committee was reluctant to issue an opinion, even advisory, that it is deceptive. It suggested the question was important enough that an official body, such as the Office of Bar Counsel or the SJC Rules Committee, take it up.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1985, before Massachusetts's adoption of the 2015 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. 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, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.
Common questions
Q: Did the committee approve "A, B, C & D, a Professional Association" for lawyers who are not partners?
A: Not exactly. The committee declined to call the name deceptive, given the term's past use in the rules and its wide use by Massachusetts firms, but it said it was "quite doubtful" the words cure the partnership implication created by joining the names.
Q: What is the standard for a firm name under the rules?
A: After the 1979 amendments, a single test: whether the name involves a deceptive statement or claim under DR 2-101(A) and DR 2-102(A). The committee said the detailed former firm-name rules were replaced by that one standard.
Q: Did the committee resolve whether the arrangement creates partnership liability?
A: No. The committee said that is a substantive-law question outside its jurisdiction; it addressed only whether the name is deceptive under the ethics rules.
Background and rules framework
The opinion applied DR 2-101(A) and DR 2-102(A) (no deceptive statement or claim in advertising or professional notices), as recast by the 1979 amendments into a single deception standard, and discussed the pre-1979 DR 2-102(B) reference to "P.A." Those correspond today to Model Rule 7.1 (communications about a lawyer's services) and Model Rule 7.5 (firm names and letterhead). The committee built on its Opinion 76-19 and ABA Opinion 310.
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- DR 2-101(A) and DR 2-102(A) / Model Rule 7.1 (no deceptive communications)
- DR 2-102(B) (pre-1979, "P.A." designation) / Model Rule 7.5 (firm names and letterhead)
Other opinions cited:
- MBA Opinions 76-19, 77-14; ABA Opinion 310: firm names and the partnership implication
See also
Source
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 1985 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.