How may a court-certified specialist announce the certification in printed announcements without misstating the credential or implying broader specialties?

Plain-English summary

An attorney certified under Supreme Court Rule 53 as a specialist in Estate Planning and Probate Law wanted to publicize the certification through printed announcements. The announcements would say she had been "appointed" by the South Carolina Supreme Court as a Certified Specialist and that she would continue to practice "with emphasis" in estate planning, trusts, wills, probate, tax, business, and corporate law, and would be sent to selected bar members, CPAs, banks, friends, and family, and published in a local newspaper. The inquiry asked whether the announcement would violate the advertising rules.

The committee identified three issues. First, on the word "appointed," it concluded that, although the certificate used that term, the proposed use was potentially misleading under Rules 7.1 and 7.4(a) because it implied the attorney had been named to some official office affiliated with the Supreme Court, which is inconsistent with Rule 53's function of recognizing attained expertise; the announcement should instead say she had been "certified." Second, on emphasis in other fields, the committee said Rule 7.4(b) permitted stating that her practice would emphasize tax, business, and corporate law so long as care was taken to avoid the inference of certified specialization in those areas, and it suggested an announcement form distinguishing the certified specialty from areas of preferred practice. Third, on direct-mail and newspaper publication, the committee said Rule 7.2 applied, requiring that a copy of the advertisement be kept for two years with a record of when and where it was used (Rule 7.2(b)), and that care be taken not to use the announcement in a manner triggering Rule 7.3(c) without complying with Rule 7.3(c), (d), and (e).

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1990, before the South Carolina Bar's adoption of the 2005 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Could the lawyer say the Supreme Court "appointed" her as a specialist?

A: The committee said no. Even though the certificate used the term, it found "appointed" potentially misleading under Rules 7.1 and 7.4(a) because it implied an official office; the announcement should say she was "certified."

Q: Could she also list other fields she emphasizes?

A: The committee said yes, under Rule 7.4(b), so long as the announcement made clear those were areas of preferred practice and did not imply certified specialization in them.

Q: What did the advertising rules require for the mailing and newspaper notice?

A: Under Rule 7.2, the committee said she had to keep a copy for two years with a record of when and where it ran, and avoid any direct-contact use that would trigger Rule 7.3(c) without meeting its requirements.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied Rule 7.1 (false or misleading communications), Rule 7.4(a)-(b) (communication of certified specialization and of fields of practice), and Rule 7.2 (advertising and record-keeping), with a cross-reference to Rule 7.3 (direct contact), corresponding to Model Rules 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, and 7.4. The certification itself arose under Supreme Court Rule 53 (the Rule on Lawyer Competence).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• South Carolina RPC 7.1 / Model Rule 7.1: no false or misleading communication about the lawyer's services.
• South Carolina RPC 7.4(a)-(b) / Model Rule 7.4: communicating certified specialization and fields of practice.
• South Carolina RPC 7.2 / Model Rule 7.2: advertising and the two-year record-keeping requirement; RPC 7.3 / Model Rule 7.3: direct contact.

Court rules:

• South Carolina Supreme Court Rule 53 (Rule on Lawyer Competence): basis for the specialist certification.

See also

• SC Bar Ethics Op. 90-23: Paralegals Carrying Firm Business Cards
• SC Bar Ethics Op. 90-25: Identifying a Law Graduate's Status

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scbar.org/for-lawyers/quicklinks/legal-resources/ethics-advisory-opinions/ethics-advisory-opinion-90-01/

Original opinion text

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

UPON THE REQUEST OF A MEMBER OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA BAR, THE ETHICS ADVISORY COMMITTEE HAS RENDERED THIS OPINION ON THE ETHICAL PROPRIETY OF THE INQUIRER’S CONTEMPLATED CONDUCT. THIS COMMITTEE HAS NO DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY. LAWYER DISCIPLINE IS ADMINISTERED SOLELY BY THE SOUTH CAROLINA SUPREME COURT THROUGH ITS COMMISSION ON LAWYER CONDUCT.

Ethics Advisory Opinion 90-01

An attorney has received certification pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 53 as a specialist in Estate Planning and Probate Law. The Attorney wishes to publish this fact through the use of printed announcements. The announcements will state that the Attorney has been "appointed" by the South Carolina Supreme Court as a "Certified Specialist in Estate Planning and Probate Law." The announcements will also state that the Attorney "will continue to practice with emphasis in the areas of Estate Planning, Trust, Wills, Probate, Tax, Business and Corporate Law." The Attorney intends to send the announcements to selected members of the Bar, C.P.A.s, banks, friends and family, and to publish a copy in a local newspaper.

Question:
Will such an announcement violate the Rules governing lawyer advertising?

Summary:
While the Attorney is permitted to advertise her certified specialty, Rules 7.1 and 7.4(a) prohibit her from stating that she has been "appointed" as a specialist. In addition, Rule 7.4(b) requires that care be taken in order to avoid the interference that the Attorney is a certified specialist in any area other than Estate Planning and Probate Law. Moreover, the announcement must be published in accordance with the requirements of Rule 7.2.

Opinion:
The Committee perceives three issues which are raised by the question presented: 1) Is it appropriate for the Attorney to state that she has been "appointed" by the Court as a Certified Specialist?, 2) Is it appropriate for the Attorney to state that her practice will have emphasis on areas of the law which are themselves the subject of certified specialization or which are seemingly included within the estate planning field?, 3) Is there any prohibition against publication of the announcement through direct mailings and printed news media? 1."Appointment" by The Court: Rule 7.4(a) of the Rules of Professional Conduct reads as follows: A lawyer who is certified under the Rule on Lawyer Competence, Supreme Court Rule 53, is entitled to advertise or state publicly in any manner otherwise permitted by these Rules that the lawyer is certified as a specialist in the pertinent specialty field by the Supreme Court of South Carolina. (emphasis added). In addition, Rule 7.1 provides that a lawyer "shall not make a false or misleading communication about the lawyer or the lawyer's services." The Committee feels that the proposed use of the term "appointed" is potentially misleading, though the certificate so states. It tends to imply that the Attorney has been named to some official office affiliated with the Supreme Court. This implication is inconsistent with Supreme Court Rule 53, which is merely a means of recognizing that an attorney has attained special expertise and satisfied certain standards. Accordingly, the announcement should merely state that the Attorney has been "certified" by the Supreme Court as a Specialist in Estate Planning and Probate Law. 2."Emphasis" in Other Fields: Rule 7.4(b) of the Rules of Professional Conduct reads as follows: A lawyer who is not certified as a specialist but who concentrates in, limits his or her practice to, or wishes to announce a willingness to accept cases in a particular field may so advertise or publicly state in any manner otherwise permitted by these Rules. To avoid confusing or misleading the public and to protect the objectives of the South Carolina certified specialization program, any such advertisement or statement shall be strictly factual and shall not contain any form of the words "certified," "specialist," "expert," or "authority." (emphasis added). A statement in the announcement that the Attorney's practice will emphasize the areas of tax, business, and corporate law is permitted by Rule 7.4(b) so long as care is taken to avoid the inference that the Attorney is a certified specialist. Accordingly, the Committee suggests the use of an announcement form distinguishing areas of certified specialty from areas of preferred practice. Jane Doe ATTORNEY AT LAW is pleased to announce that she has been certified by The Supreme Court of South Carolina as a Specialist in Estate Planning and Probate Law including Estate Planning, Trusts, Wills, and Probate Her practice will also continue to emphasize the areas of Tax, Business and Corporate Law 3. Direct Mail Advertising: Rule 7.2 of the Rules of Professional Conduct reads as follows: (a) Subject to the requirements of Rules 7.1 and 7.3, a lawyer may advertise services through public media, such as a telephone directory, legal directory, newspaper or other periodical, outdoor advertising, radio or television, or through written or recorded communication. (b) A copy or recording of an advertisement or communication shall be kept for two years after its last dissemination along with a record of when and where it was used. (emphasis added). Because the Attorney indicates an intent to distribute her announcement to C.P.A.s, banks and friends, and to publish a copy in the newspaper, Rule 7.2 clearly applies. She should take care to comply with the requirements of Rule 7.2(b). Additionally, care should be taken not to use the announcements in a fashion described by Rule 7.3 (c) without complying with the requirements of Rules 7.3 (c), (d), and (e).