May a lawyer who serves as special counsel to a public housing authority print 'Special Counsel for Public Housing Authority of the State of New Jersey' on his own law-office letterhead?

Plain-English summary

An attorney asked whether special counsel for a political subdivision of the State, such as a Public Housing Authority, could have "Special Counsel for Public Housing Authority of the State of New Jersey" printed on his own attorney-at-law letterheads. The Committee pointed to its Opinion 60, which had addressed whether the name of counsel for eleemosynary institutions or certain civic organizations serving without compensation could be listed on the letterheads of those institutions or organizations where other officers were also named, and which had said that even there, including the attorney's address or telephone number would clearly violate Canon 27's prohibition on advertising by members of the bar.

Quoting Opinion 60, the Committee restated the test: whether the information about who is counsel for the organization is clearly and primarily in the organization's interest and does not have the effect of unduly advertising the attorney. Applying that test, it concluded that the designation suggested here, placing the public appointment on the lawyer's own letterhead, would be improper as a violation of Canon 27.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in March 1965, before New Jersey's September 13, 1971 adoption of the Disciplinary Rules (Code of Professional Responsibility), and well before the 1984 Rules of Professional Conduct and all later revisions. It applied Canon 27 of the Canons of Professional Ethics on advertising. Lawyer letterheads and communications about a lawyer's services are now treated under RPC 7.1 and RPC 7.5, and constitutional limits changed substantially after Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977). Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Could a lawyer put a public-counsel appointment on his own law letterhead?

A: No. The Committee held that printing "Special Counsel for Public Housing Authority of the State of New Jersey" on the lawyer's own attorney-at-law letterhead would be improper under Canon 27.

Q: What was the test the Committee applied?

A: Quoting its Opinion 60, the Committee asked whether the listing was clearly and primarily in the organization's interest without unduly advertising the attorney, and found this letterhead designation failed that test.

Q: Could counsel's name appear on the organization's own letterhead instead?

A: The Committee's Opinion 60 addressed listing counsel on an institution's or organization's letterhead where other officers are named, but cautioned that even there, adding the attorney's address or telephone number would violate Canon 27.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied Canon 27 of the Canons of Professional Ethics, the advertising prohibition, and the test from its Opinion 60: a listing is permissible only when clearly and primarily in the organization's interest and not unduly self-advertising. In current New Jersey terms, lawyer letterheads and communications are governed by RPC 7.1 and RPC 7.5.

Citations and references

Other authorities:

• Canons of Professional Ethics, Canon 27 (advertising)
• Drinker, Legal Ethics 262 (1953)

Other opinions cited:

• NJ ACPE Opinion 60, 87 N.J.L.J. 769 (1964): counsel for an institution may be listed on its letterhead only if clearly in the organization's interest and not unduly advertising the attorney

See also

• NJ ACPE Op. 75: A Motor Club's List of Claim Attorneys
• NJ ACPE Op. 305: A Foreign Attorney's Legal Title on a Bank's Letterhead
• NJ ACPE Op. 307: A Foreign Attorney in a Firm Name and a Management Specialty

Source

• Landing page: https://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/advisory-committee-on-professional-ethics/2004/acp72-1.html

Original opinion text

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

88 N.J.L.J. 171
March 18, 1965

OPINION 72

Letterheads

An attorney asks whether special counsel for a political subdivision of the State, such as the Public Housing Authority, can have printed on his attorney-at-law letterheads, "Special Counsel for Public Housing Authority of the State of New Jersey."

This Committee's Opinion 60, 87 N.J.L.J. 769 (1964), parts 2 and 3, dealt with inquiries as to whether the name of counsel for eleemosynary institutions or for certain civic organizations, serving without compensation, may be listed on the letterheads of such institutions or organizations provided that other officers are also named thereon. Even in those instances the opinion stated that the inclusion of the attorney's address and/or telephone number would clearly be in violation of Canons of Professional Ethics, Canon 27, proscribing advertising by members of the bar.

We concluded our Opinion 60 as follows:

The test is whether the information as to who is counsel for the organization is clearly and primarily in its interest and has not the effect of unduly advertising the attorney. Drinker, Legal Ethics 262 (1953).

It is clear the designation as suggested in the instant query would be improper as violative of the canon.