Can a lawyer list deceased lawyer relatives and a 'lawyers since 1840' family lineage on his letterhead?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry asked whether a letterhead reading "(Name of Town) Lawyers / Since 1840:" followed by three generations of deceased relatives with their dates and nicknames ("Great Grand Paw," "Grand Paw," "Dad") violated the Canons.

The committee concluded that the listing violated the spirit, if not the letter, of ABA Canon 27 (which disapproves of self-laudation) and ABA Canon 29 (which admonishes lawyers to uphold the dignity of the profession). One member also viewed it as violating ABA Canon 33, under which carrying the name of a deceased partner or associate is improper after the partnership ends. While some members did not think it violated any Canon, the committee was unanimous that it showed bad taste, tended to lower the dignity of the profession, and should be discontinued. The vote was 7-3.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1950, under the former Texas Canons of Ethics, which the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct replaced effective January 1, 1990. The self-laudation framework the opinion applies predates Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977), which held that categorical bans on lawyer advertising violate the First Amendment, so the Canon framework used here has since been substantially narrowed; letterheads and communications about a lawyer's services are now addressed by ABA Model Rules 7.1 and 7.5. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Why was the multi-generation letterhead improper?

A: The committee viewed listing deceased relatives with dates and nicknames as self-laudation that offended the spirit of ABA Canons 27 and 29; even members who saw no clear violation found it in bad taste and said it should be discontinued (7-3).

Q: Did it matter that the listed lawyers were deceased relatives, not former partners?

A: One member invoked ABA Canon 33 (on carrying a deceased partner's name after a partnership ends), but the committee's main rationale rested on self-laudation and the dignity of the profession rather than partnership-name rules.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets former Texas Canon 24 and ABA Canons 27, 29, and 33, applied to a self-promotional letterhead. The modern analogs are ABA Model Rule 7.1 (communications about a lawyer's services) and Model Rule 7.5 (firm names and letterheads).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services), as the modern analog
• MR 7.5 (firm names and letterheads), as the modern analog
• Texas Canon 24, ABA Canons 27, 29, and 33

Cases:

• Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (U.S. 1977), held categorical bans on lawyer advertising unconstitutional (noted for currency; not cited in the 1950 opinion)

See also

• TX Ethics Op. 50: Listing an Unadmitted Associate on a Firm Letterhead
• TX Ethics Op. 60: Newspaper Card Reciting Years of Practice
• TX Ethics Op. 44: Large Neon Office Signs as Improper Advertising

Source

• Landing page: https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-31/
• Original PDF: https://tcle-web.s3.amazonaws.com/public/documents/Opinion_31.pdf

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION PRESENTED

Does the carrying of the following on the letterhead of an attorney violate any of the Canons of Ethics?
(Name of Town) Lawyers
Since 1840:
(Name) , 1840-1878
"Great Grand Paw"
(Name) , 1878-1918
"Grand Paw"
(Name) , 1910-1950
"Dad"

18 Baylor L. Rev. 209 (1966)

SELF LAUDATION - DIGNITY OF THE PROFESSION - LETTERHEADS
An attorney may not carry the names of deceased relatives on his letterhead.

Canon 24. A.B.A. Canons 27, 29.

It is the opinion of the committee that such listing violates the spirit if not the letter, of American Bar Canon 27, which disapproves of self-laudation, and American Bar Canon 29, which admonishes lawyers to uphold the dignity of the profession. It is also the opinion of one member that it violates American Bar Canon 33, under which the practice of carrying the name of a deceased partner or associate is considered improper after the partnership ceases to exist.

While some members of the committee did not think it violated any Canon, they were unanimously of the opinion that it showed bad taste, tended to lower the dignity of the profession, and its use should be discontinued. (7-3)

Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 31 (1950)