Can a North Carolina lawyer use a leased shared-office address or a P.O. box as the office address on letterhead and advertising?

Plain-English summary

The opinion addresses two ways a lawyer might list an address that is not a conventional staffed street office. The first is a leased time-shared office: a company rents meeting rooms by appointment, sometimes with mail forwarding and call answering, and markets "prestigious addresses" for use on stationery. The opinion concludes a firm may use such an address on letterhead and advertising, subject to the rule against misleading communications. Rule 7.2(c) requires advertisements to include the name and office address of at least one responsible lawyer or firm, and Rule 7.1(a) prohibits false or misleading communications. Drawing on RPC 217, the opinion explains it is misleading to imply that a firm has a local office or lawyer in a community when it does not.

So using a time-shared address would be misleading if the firm's only connection to the community is the right to use meeting rooms there as needed. But the opinion treats this as case-by-case: the communication is not misleading where the lawyer actually lives in the community associated with the address and uses the leased office to meet clients regularly, or where the communication includes an explanation that accurately reflects the firm's presence, such as "by appointment only."

The second question concerns a lawyer running a virtual law firm from a home office who does not want to publish her home address for safety and privacy reasons. The opinion concludes that a post office address qualifies as an "office address" for Rule 7.2(c), provided it is on file as the lawyer's current mailing address in her State Bar membership record. The opinion explains that the Committee's earlier reading of "office address" as requiring a street address had become impractical as more lawyers work from home offices or operate virtual practices, and is no longer necessary to avoid misleading the public or to let the State Bar locate the responsible lawyer.

In practice

Under the North Carolina rules as they stood at the time of the opinion, conduct in which a lawyer lists a leased time-shared office address is permitted unless it misleads about the firm's actual presence in the community. Per the opinion, the line is the rule against misleading communications: a time-shared address is acceptable where the lawyer genuinely is connected to the community (lives there and meets clients there regularly) or where the listing carries an accurate explanation such as "by appointment only," and whether a given listing is misleading is judged case by case.

Per the opinion, a lawyer may also satisfy Rule 7.2(c) with a post office address, so long as that address is the lawyer's current mailing address in the State Bar's membership records. The opinion frames this as a change from the prior interpretation that required a street address, made in recognition of home-office and virtual practice.

Common questions

Q: Can a firm put a leased shared-office (virtual office) address on its letterhead?

A: Yes, with a caveat. Opinion #1 permits it under Rules 7.2(c) and 7.1(a) unless the listing misleads about the firm's actual presence in the community; that determination is made case by case.

Q: When does using a shared-office address become misleading?

A: When the firm's only connection to the community is the time-share lease and the listing implies a local office or lawyer. The opinion points to RPC 217 and concludes a disclaimer such as "by appointment only," or the lawyer's genuine presence in the community, avoids the problem.

Q: Can a lawyer list a P.O. box instead of a street address in advertising?

A: Yes. Opinion #2 holds a post office address qualifies as an "office address" under Rule 7.2(c) if it is on file as the lawyer's current mailing address in the lawyer's State Bar membership record.

Q: Why did the Committee allow a P.O. box when it previously required a street address?

A: The opinion explains that requiring a street address had become impractical as more lawyers work from home offices or run virtual practices, and was no longer necessary to avoid misleading the public or to enable the State Bar to locate the responsible lawyer.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies North Carolina Rule 7.2 (advertising, the analogue of Model Rule 7.2), whose subsection (c) requires the name and office address of at least one responsible lawyer or firm, together with Rule 7.1 (false or misleading communications, the analogue of Model Rule 7.1). It relies on the prior North Carolina opinion RPC 217 for the principle that implying a local office or lawyer where none exists is misleading.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.2 / NC Rule 7.2(c) (advertising; name and office address of responsible lawyer)
• MR 7.1 / NC Rule 7.1(a) (false or misleading communications)

Other opinions cited:

• NC RPC 217: implying a local office or lawyer presence where there is none is misleading.

See also

• ABA Formal Op. 498: Virtual Practice
• FL Bar Ethics Op. 62-64: Hotel Office Address and Phone
• FL Bar Ethics Op. 62-42: Home Law Office and Business Card

Source

• Landing page: https://www.ncbar.gov/for-lawyers/ethics-and-governing-rules/ethics-opinions/opinions/2012-formal-ethics-opinion-6/

Original opinion text

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

Inquiry #1:

ABC Company offers to lease office space to law firms. The office lease is a time-sharing arrangement in which lawyers use meeting rooms by appointment. Depending upon the lease, ABC Company may also provide mail forwarding and personalized call answering. ABC Company advertises that it provides businesses with “prestigious addresses” that can be utilized on business cards and stationary.

May a law firm enter into a lease with ABC Company and use the leased office address as the law firm’s address on letterhead and advertising?

Opinion #1:

Yes, subject to certain requirements.

Rule 7.2(c) provides that a lawyer’s advertisements must include the name and office address of at least one lawyer or law firm responsible for its content. Rule 7.1(a) provides that a lawyer shall not make a false or misleading communication about the lawyer or the lawyer's services. “It is a misleading communication for a law firm to infer that it has an office or a lawyer located in a community when, in fact, there is no law office or lawyer for the firm present in the community.” RPC 217. In RPC 217, the Ethics Committee concluded that listing what appears to be a local telephone number in an advertisement in a particular community, without including an explanation that the number is not a local telephone number and that there is no law office in that community, is misleading as to the actual location of the law firm.

Similarly, it would be misleading for a law firm to use a leased time-shared office address on letterhead or in advertising to infer that the law firm has an office or a lawyer located in a community when the law firm’s only connection with the community is the lease arrangement that allows a lawyer to use meeting rooms in that community on an “as needed” basis.

However, the use of a leased time-shared office address in communications may not be misleading depending upon the law firm’s connection to the community or the disclosures included in the communication. Whether such a communication is misleading must be determined on a case-by-case basis.

A lawyer who does not wish to meet clients at his home, or to list his home address on letterhead and advertisements, does not mislead the public by using a time-shared leased office address on letterhead and advertisements when the lawyer actually lives in the community associated with the leased address and uses the leased office to meet with clients on a regular basis.

In addition, it is not misleading for a law firm to list a time-shared leased office address on letterhead or in advertising so long as the communication contains an explanation that accurately reflects the law firm’s presence at the address (i.e.,“by appointment only”).

Inquiry #2:

Lawyer operates a “virtual law firm” from an office located in her home. She communicates with her clients online and by the telephone. She does not meet with clients in person except on rare occasions at locations outside of her home. Rule 7.2(c) of the Rules of Professional Conduct requires a lawyer to include “the name and office address of at least one lawyer or law firm” on every advertisement. Lawyer would like to advertise her virtual law firm, but she does not want to include her home address in the advertisements because she is concerned about her safety and privacy. She is considering using a leased office address in her community, as described in Inquiry #1, to circumvent this problem, but would prefer not to incur this expense.

May Lawyer list her post office address, which is the address listed for her on the membership records of the North Carolina State Bar, on advertising to comply with Rule 7.2(c)?

Opinion #2:

Previously, the Ethics Committee interpreted the “office address” requirement in Rule 7.2(c) to mean a street address. However, requiring a street address in all legal advertising has proved problematic, particularly as the number of lawyers working from home offices or operating virtual law practices has increased. The requirement is no longer practical or necessary to avoid misleading the public or to insure that a lawyer responsible for the advertisement can be located by the State Bar. Moreover, the membership department of the North Carolina State Bar accepts post office addresses as a lawyer’s address.

Therefore, a post office address qualifies as an “office address" for purposes of Rule 7.2(c) provided the post office address is on file as the lawyer’s current mailing address in the lawyer’s membership record with the North Carolina State Bar.