Communications About Legal Services · 4-10% of the exam
21.1.2Firm names and professional designations (Rule 7.1)
On this page
- Rule 7.1 — Firm Names and Professional Designations
A firm's name is a communication about legal services and must satisfy the same non-misleading standard as any advertisement. Three tested pressure points: a name that persists after a partner takes public office, trade names implying governmental affiliation, and names suggesting associations the firm doesn't have.
Why
A name on a door or a letterhead is the first thing a prospective client reads, and it is read as a claim about who stands behind the work. Left unregulated, a name could suggest partners who are not there, public backing that does not exist, or an institution where there is a private practice.
Plain English
A firm may use the names of its current members, and the names of deceased members where there has been a succession in the firm's identity, and may adopt a trade name or a distinctive digital designation, provided none of those choices implies a false connection.
A retired partner's name is judged by the same non-misleading standard. If a lawyer holds public office and stops actively practicing, that lawyer's name must come off the door during the absence.
Rule
Rule 7.1 — Firm Names and Professional Designations
Permitted:
Names of current partners, all or some;
Comment [5]: names of deceased members where there has been a succession in the firm's identity;
The name of a retired partner, judged by the same non-misleading standard — Comment [8] reaches only a lawyer holding public office, and nothing in Comment [5] bars it;
Trade names (e.g., "The Bulldog Law Firm") if not false or misleading and not implying a connection with a government agency or public/charitable legal-services organization;
Multi-jurisdiction firms may use the same name and contact information across jurisdictions;
Comment [5]: a distinctive website address, social media username, or comparable professional designation that is not misleading.
Not permitted:
Comment [8]: using the name of a lawyer who holds public office during any substantial period when that lawyer is not actively and regularly practicing with the firm;
Comment [5]: implying connection with a government agency, a nonlawyer, or a lawyer never associated with the firm or its predecessors;
Suggesting a partnership or organizational structure that does not exist;
Comment [5]: geographical names implying a public legal-aid agency may require an express disclaimer that the firm is not a public organization.
Example 1
Ex. 1
Lena, Marco, and Nina built their firm over fifteen years. Lena receives a federal judicial appointment for a ten-year term and immediately stops all client work. They wish to keep "Lena, Marco & Nina LLP," reasoning that Lena intends to return.
Follow the test the rule states, not the one Lena's partners are applying. Keeping the name is impermissible. The governing test isn't whether Lena intends to return; it's whether she is actively and regularly practicing with the firm. She is not. The name must be changed for as long as she holds office and remains absent. Had Lena died, her name could stay where there has been a succession in the firm's identity; had she retired, the name would be judged by the ordinary non-misleading standard. Judicial-office absence, not death or retirement, triggers the removal requirement.
The exam will substitute stated intent for actual conduct and say the name may stay. That's wrong. The recurring tested scenario is a partner who takes the bench for a substantial term; during that absence, the name must come off.
Office-sharing example. Two lawyers share office space and split overhead costs but handle no matters jointly and have formed no partnership. They post "Kim & Jay — Attorneys at Law" on the door.
Try reading the door as a stranger would, not as Kim and Jay know it to be. The name violates Rule 7.1. It implies a partnership or joint enterprise that doesn't exist. The misleading name is not the only consequence: under Rule 1.0, Comment [2], lawyers who present themselves to the public in a way that suggests they are a firm should be regarded as a firm for purposes of the Rules, so the same door that breaks Rule 7.1 can also make Kim and Jay a firm for imputation under Rule 1.10 (Chapter 9). Each lawyer must present only their own practice identity, or the sign must make clear that the two are separate practices sharing a space — for example, "Kim, Attorney at Law — Jay, Attorney at Law."
Questions · 2
Q 01ch21-e02
Question 1 of 2 · Rule 7.1
Alpha, Beta and Partner founded a firm two decades ago that handles municipal bond work, and the firm name lists all three. Partner was appointed to a six-year term as the state insurance commissioner, a full-time post. On taking the oath Partner resigned from every client matter, moved out of the office, and stopped drawing any share of the firm income. Partner told Alpha and Beta of an intention to rejoin the practice the day the term ends, and the three agreed that the name should stay as it is. The letterhead, the signage and the website continue to carry all three names. Callers who ask are told that Partner is away on public service. May the firm keep Partner's name in the firm name during the term?
Keys 1 to 4 choose.