WSBA 2007

Can a Washington law firm registered as a PLLC use a trade name that drops the PLLC designation?

Short answer: Yes. The committee concluded that under RPC 7.5(a) a PLLC law firm may use a trade name as long as it is not misleading, and it found the proposed name not misleading on its face; because the name could suggest a partnership, the committee said the inquirer should consider either adding a disclaimer that the firm is a PLLC or including the firm's legal name in its materials.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 2007. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current rules of professional conduct in your state, with citations.

Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.

About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

Plain-English summary

The inquiring lawyer asked whether a law firm registered as a professional limited liability company (PLLC) may identify itself to the public under a trade name that does not include the PLLC designation.

The committee answered yes. Under RPC 7.5(a), a law firm may conduct business under a trade name so long as the name is not misleading, and the committee found the proposed trade name not misleading on its face: the proposed trade name and the firm's legal name are identical except that the legal name includes the PLLC designation. Because the trade name (referred to in the opinion as "X&Y") could be construed to suggest a partnership, the committee said the inquirer should consider either (1) adding an express disclaimer in the marketing materials that the firm is a PLLC, or (2) including the firm's legal name somewhere in those materials, to avoid any misleading implication that the firm is a partnership. On any substantive legal requirements governing a Washington lawyer's or PLLC's use of a trade name, the committee advised the inquirer to consult applicable Washington and federal law.

In practice

Under this opinion, and under RPC 7.5(a) as it stood at the time, a PLLC law firm's use of a trade name that omits the PLLC designation is permitted when the name is not misleading. The committee treated the proposed name as not misleading on its face because it matched the firm's legal name apart from the entity designation. Where the trade name could imply a partnership, the committee identified two steps the opinion says the inquirer should consider: a disclaimer of PLLC status, or inclusion of the firm's legal name in the materials. The committee did not opine on non-ethics legal requirements for trade-name use, directing the inquirer to Washington and federal law.

Common questions

Q: Can a Washington PLLC law firm advertise under a trade name that leaves off "PLLC"?

A: Yes, if the name is not misleading. The committee concluded RPC 7.5(a) permits a trade name and found this one not misleading on its face because it matched the legal name except for the PLLC designation.

Q: What if the trade name could look like a partnership?

A: The committee said the inquirer should consider either adding an express disclaimer that the firm is a PLLC, or including the firm's legal name in the marketing materials, to avoid implying a partnership.

Q: Did the committee address the non-ethics legal requirements for using a trade name?

A: No. It advised the inquirer to consult applicable Washington and federal law on any substantive legal requirements for a Washington lawyer's or PLLC's use of a trade name.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Washington RPC 7.5(a) (firm names and letterheads; the counterpart to Model Rule 7.5), which permits a lawyer to practice under a trade name that is not misleading. The committee applied that not-misleading standard to a PLLC operating under a trade name that omits the entity designation.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

Model Rule 7.5 / Washington RPC 7.5(a) (firm names and trade names; a trade name is permitted if it is not misleading)

Source

Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=1580

Original opinion text

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

Advisory Opinion: 2135
Year Issued: 2007
RPC(s): RPC 7.5(a)
Subject: Use of trade name by a lawfirm operating as a PLLC

The inquiring lawyer asks whether a law firm, which is registered as a professional limited liability company (PLLC), may use a trade name without the PLLC designation to identify itself to the public.

Yes. Under the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct, a law firm may conduct business under a trade name as long as it is not misleading. See Rule 7.5(a) of the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct. The firm’s trade name is not misleading on its face. The proposed trade name and the legal name of the firm are identical except for the fact that the legal name obviously includes the PLLC designation. Given that fact and the fact that the trade name X&Y could be construed to suggest a partnership, the inquirer should consider either (1) adding an express disclaimer in the marketing materials that the firm is a PLLC, or (2) including the firm’s legal name somewhere in those materials to avoid any misleading implication that the firm is a partnership. As for any substantive legal requirements concerning use of a trade name by a Washington lawyer of PLLC, we advise that the inquiring lawyer consult applicable Washington and federal law.

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 2007 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.