Careers

Diversity, Equity & Inclusion

Experience

Innovation

Interactive Maps

Locations

About

Pages

Meet our team of innovators
Ask us how we do it

Professionals

Insights

Services

Thompson Hine LLP, a full-service business law firm with approximately 400 lawyers in 11 offices, was ranked number 1 in the category “Most innovative North American law firms: New working models” by The Financial Times and was 1 of 7 firms shortlisted for The American Lawyer’s inaugural Legal Services Innovation Award. The firm has been recognized by the National Law Journal as a Legal Technology Trailblazer and featured by Bloomberg for its innovative service delivery models, which drive accuracy and predictability. The firm’s commitment to innovation is embodied in Thompson Hine SmartPaTHTM – a smarter way to work – predictable, efficient and aligned with client goals. For more information, please visit ThompsonHine.com and ThompsonHine.com/SmartPaTH.

Home | Thompson Hine LLP

Atlanta

Chicago

Cincinnati

Cleveland

Columbus

Dayton

Los Angeles

Minneapolis

New York

Silicon Valley

Washington, D.C.

<img style="max-width: 100%;height: auto;max-width: 100%;height: auto" loading="lazy" class="alignright size-medium wp-image-3479" src="https://www.thelawforlawyerstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/754/2017/08/Law-office-sign-300x200.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="200">Putting your law firm name on coffee mugs and <a href="https://www.thelawforlawyerstoday.com/2015/07/looking-for-creative-legal-marketing-try-doughnuts/">giving away donuts to prospective clients</a> is apparently not enough anymore.&nbsp;&nbsp;Recent firm branding campaigns have included&nbsp;sponsorships of pro golfers and cricket players, <a href="http://www.law.com/sites/almstaff/2017/08/09/another-big-firm-gets-into-the-sports-sponsorship-game/">including emblazoning the bats with the firm name</a>.
That may be the trend of the future in Biglaw, but a much more modest marketing effort recently landed an Ohio lawyer in disciplinary trouble.
No Justice, no peace?
According to the <a href="http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/0/2017/2017-Ohio-5698.pdf">opinion</a>, from 1981-1997, the lawyer in question practiced with another attorney, who eventually became (and continues to be) a Justice of the Ohio Supreme Court.&nbsp; Fast forward to 2015.&nbsp; With the permission of the Justice, the lawyer began using their old firm name, including on&nbsp;business cards,&nbsp;and hung a sign outside the office saying &ldquo;O&rsquo;Neill &amp; Brown Law Office (Est. 1981).&rdquo;
That only lasted for a few weeks before the local bar association began investigating.&nbsp; After the disciplinary authorities advised the Justice that the sign violated Ohio ethics rules, the Justice instructed the lawyer to remove his name from the sign, and eventually the lawyer&nbsp;did so.
False and misleading
The Ohio Supreme Court (with the Justice in question not participating)&nbsp;agreed with the Board of Professional Conduct that the firm name on the sign and business card, and the reference to the firm having been established in 1981 were false or misleading communications that violated&nbsp;Ohio&rsquo;s version of <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_7_1_communication_concerning_a_lawyer_s_services.html">Model Rule 7.1</a>.&nbsp; The court also found&nbsp;a violation of&nbsp;Rule <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/rule_7_5_firm_names_letterhead.html">7.5(c)</a>, which prohibits using&nbsp;a judge&rsquo;s name in a firm name or other firm communication,&nbsp;unless&nbsp;the judge regularly and actively practices with the firm.
By&nbsp;a 4-3 vote, the court&nbsp;imposed a two-year stayed suspension on the lawyer.&nbsp; A significant aggravating factor contributed to the sanction:&nbsp; this wasn&rsquo;t the lawyer&rsquo;s first rodeo &mdash; he&rsquo;d been disciplined several times before, according to the opinion, including a previous suspension for threatening a judge who served as chair of the local bar grievance committee.&nbsp; But in mitigation, the court noted that his conduct &ldquo;did not involve the provision of legal services,&rdquo; that no clients were harmed, and that the Justice participated in the decision to use the &ldquo;O&rsquo;Neill &amp; Brown Law Office&rdquo; name on the sign.
The three-judge minority would have imposed an &ldquo;indefinite&rdquo; suspension, which in Ohio is a term of at least two years.
Stick to the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tchotchke">tchotchkes</a>
A good lesson here.&nbsp; A prominent legal moniker on your office sign may be good marketing, but it would be best to stick to the coffee mugs &mdash; or cricket bats.

core/freeform

Ethics

Legal Ethics, Professional Responsibility and the Business of Law

Using justice’s name as part of firm name was misleading, court says