Opinion 61-14
FLORIDA BAR ETHICS OPINION OPINION 61-14 September 12, 1961 Advisory ethics opinions are not binding. The Integration Rule prohibits a lawyer not a member of The Florida Bar from holding himself out as a practitioner. Thus a law firm may not name such a lawyer on its letterhead even though noting the lawyer is not a member of The Florida Bar. Caveat: This opinion does not consider an interstate partnership. Canon: 47 [See current 4-5.5] Chairman Holcomb stated the opinion of the committee: A member of The Florida Bar submits an inquiry as to whether or not it would be proper for his firm to send out announcements of additions to the firm, giving the names of two out-of-state lawyers not admitted to practice in Florida at present but who are taking the Florida Bar examination in a short time. The question is whether it would be possible to list these individuals as not admitted in Florida but showing the state of their admission. The majority opinion is that it would be improper to list on the firm letterhead lawyers not admitted to practice in Florida, and they would therefore fall into the category of laymen or non-lawyers, so far as Florida is concerned. This appears to be contrary to the statement contained in “Your Privileges and Responsibilities as a Lawyer in Florida” under the heading on page 34 of “Florida Activities by Out-of-State Lawyers,” where on page 36 it is stated that it would be proper and ethical for a firm letterhead to show the name of an out-of-state partner accompanied by a memorandum that he was not admitted to practice in Florida. However, under the present status of the Integration Rule prohibiting practice in Florida by out-of-state lawyers, we believe that the listing of an out-of-state lawyer not admitted to practice in Florida would be improper.