Opinion ID: 1130023
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: false and misleading communications on legal letterhead, business cards and billing statements

Text: A lawyer shall not make a false or misleading communication about his (or her) services (Rule 7.1) [10] or knowingly make a false statement of material fact or law to a third person (Rule 4.1). [11] A communication is false or misleading if it (a) contains a material misrepresentation of fact or law (Rule 7.1(a)(1)) or (b) is likely to create an unjustified expectation about the results the lawyer can achieve (Rule 7.1(a)(2)). [12] A lawyer's letterhead, billing statement or business card is a communication within the meaning of Rule 7.1. [13] As a licensing agency for lawyers, this court has the responsibility to protect the public from those practitioners who falsely represent their specialities. This duty includes protection of governmental agencies (with whom a lawyer may deal on matters of some specialized law) from practitioners who would use their state licenses to misrepresent their true qualifications in a given field of legal expertise. A false, misleading or deceptive communication, which does not constitute commercial speech entitled to First Amendment protection, may be subject to regulation. [14] The Bar asserts Leigh has violated the cited Rules of Professional Conduct (a) by the inclusion of CPA and tax lawyer on his business card, (b) by the use of CPA, Senior Attorney and Director of Services in his legal letterhead and (c) in his communications with third persons on behalf of his client. We hold that respondent's use of the CPA designation on his legal letterhead and business card  after he had failed to pass the CPA exam  is a false and material communication about his qualifications to both present and potential clients, as well as to third persons, which is likely to create an unjustified expectation about the results he can achieve. The letterhead not only misrepresented Leigh's status qua CPA, but also his position as a senior member of Leigh & Company when, in fact, he was a sole legal practitioner uncertified as a CPA. Furthermore, respondent's use of the CPA title to support a billing rate on his statements for services  printed on his legal letterhead  misrepresented the factors to be considered in arriving at the reasonableness of his fee. Respondent's conduct is not only false and misleading within the meaning of Rules 1.5, 4.1, 7.1, 7.4, and 7.5, but also constitutes professional misconduct under Rule 8.4(c). [15]