The Florida Bar

Ethics Opinion

Opinion 71-49

FLORIDA BAR ETHICS OPINION
OPINION 71-49
October 18, 1971
Advisory ethics opinions are not binding.
When a partner withdraws from his firm, he may not continue to be listed as a member of that
firm, even though he will continue to handle its trial work on referral basis. The attorney may be
listed “of counsel” with his former firm if he maintains a continuing relationship with it.
CPR:

EC 2-11; DR 2-102(A)(4)
Chairman Clarkson stated the opinion of the committee:
A member of The Florida Bar, here identified as “D,” has in the past
practiced as a partner in the law firm of “A, B, C & D.” He now proposes to
withdraw from the firm as a partner and to occupy an adjacent but independent
office under an arrangement whereby he will continue to handle his former firm’s
trial work on a referral basis. He inquires whether:
1. The firm name of “A, B, C & D” may properly be continued under these
circumstances, and
2. “D” may be listed as “of counsel” on the firm’s letterhead.

The Committee has concluded that EC 2-11 explicitly forbids continuing “D’s” name in
the firm name after his withdrawal as a partner. The obvious reason underlying EC 2-11 is that it
would be misleading to include in a partnership name the name of a lawyer who is not in fact a
partner and consequently not responsible for the conduct of the business of the partnership.
The inquirer’s second question is answered in the affirmative. DR 2-102(A)(4) provides
that: “A lawyer may be designated ‘Of Counsel’ on a letterhead if he has a continuing
relationship with a lawyer or law firm, other than as a partner or associate.” One committeeman
dissents from this holding, theorizing that the quoted language was not intended to apply to a
lawyer proposing to carry on a regular and active law practice independent of the firm from
which he has withdrawn.