Can a lawyer run a newspaper classified ad offering income-tax return preparation and claiming to be a tax specialist?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry asked whether a classified newspaper advertisement reading "Income Taxes / Be Safe, have your report made by a lawyer. / Specialist income tax laws. / 2330 Dallas, Phone 7581" violated the Canons.

The committee was unanimous that such an advertisement violated Canons 24 and 39 of the State Bar of Texas, and (per its reasoning) Canons 27 and 43 of the American Bar Association. The vote was 10-0. The advertisement both solicited business and claimed a specialty.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1951, under the former Texas Canons of Ethics, which the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct replaced effective January 1, 1990. The advertising restriction 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; lawyer advertising and claims of specialization are now addressed by ABA Model Rules 7.1 and 7.4. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 income-tax ad improper?

A: The committee held (10-0) that the classified advertisement soliciting tax-return work was barred by the advertising Canons (Texas Canons 24 and 39) then in force.

Q: Did claiming to be a "specialist" in tax law add to the problem?

A: The advertisement claimed "Specialist income tax laws," and the committee found the ad violated Canon 39 (which governed specialty claims) along with Canon 24.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets former Texas Canons 24 (advertising and solicitation) and 39 (claims of specialization), and the corresponding ABA Canons, applied to a newspaper classified ad. The modern analogs are ABA Model Rules 7.1 (communications about a lawyer's services) and 7.4 (communication of fields of practice and specialization).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 7.1 (communications concerning a lawyer's services), as the modern analog
• MR 7.4 (fields of practice and specialization), as the modern analog
• Texas Canons 24 (advertising and solicitation), 39 (specialty claims), and the corresponding ABA Canons

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 1951 opinion)

See also

• TX Ethics Op. 44: Large Neon Office Signs as Improper Advertising
• TX Ethics Op. 38: Smaller Suburban Neon Sign Permitted
• TX Ethics Op. 51: Listing in a Classified Directory

Source

• Landing page: https://www.legalethicstexas.com/resources/opinions/opinion-40/
• Original PDF: https://tcle-web.s3.amazonaws.com/public/documents/Opinion_40.pdf

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION PRESENTED

Is the following advertisement, namely

"Income Taxes
Be Safe, have your report made by a lawyer.
Specialist income tax laws.
2330 Dallas, Phone 7581"

which is carried in the classified section of a newspaper, in violation of Canons of Ethics?

June 1951
18 Baylor L. Rev. 213 (1966)

SOLICITATION - ADVERTISING - PROFESSIONAL LISTING - NEWSPAPERS
An ad stating "Income Taxes / Be Safe, have your report made by a lawyer / Specialist income tax laws," and including the lawyer's address and telephone number, is improper.

Canons 24, 39. A.B.A. Canons 24, 43.

This committee unanimously holds that such advertisements is in violation of Canons 24 and 39 of the State Bar of Texas, and Canons 27 and 43 of the American Bar Association. (10-0)

Tex. Comm. On Professional Ethics, Op. 40 (1951)