|
Dr. Lawyer
This came up on another thread and I did not want to burden it with a side issue.
Someone stated If you're a lawyer with a Juris Doctorate degree, you're entitled to use the designation "Dr." I have a Juris Doctorate degree, and practiced law for 35 years before retiring, specializing in trials and appeals. I taught seminars for lawyers, judges, prosecutors and other governmental officials all over the US, and every lawyer I ever knew understood that he had earned the right to use the title. The first time I was addressed as Dr. was when the degree was conferred on me by the Dean of my law school, at the graduation ceremony. All correspondence from the university alumni association uses that title in addressing me. Most lawyers, like me, don't use the title, but some do, and, having been through the rigors of law school and the bar exam, they're thoroughly justified in doing so. I'm astonished a lawyer wouldn't know that, and that a lawyer would deprecate his own degree, in view of the effort that one must make to become a real lawyer.
Actually, in my decades of practice I have never, I mean not once seen any US lawyer refer to himself with the title "doctor." Have never seen it in any legal papers filed either. I looked at my Yellow Pages under the attorney section and did not see anyone using that title. If anyone did use the title doctor I think they would come across as pretentious, and I believe that others in my profession would feel the same.
However, as I understand my ethical obligations, I am required to point out that the use by a US lawyer of the term "doctor" is sanctionable in some states and it might be sanctionable in any state it its is misleading. I quote from the American Bar Association website:
By Peter H. Geraghty
Director, ETHICSearch
ABA Center for Professional Responsibility
You have a solo practice in civil rights litigation under the name John Smith, Attorney at Law. You also teach part time at a local community college where you offer a course on the introduction to constitutional law. Can you refer to yourself as Dr. John Smith? . . .
Discussion
Are there any Doctors in the House?
State bar opinions are split over whether a lawyer may refer to himself as “Dr.” or “Doctor”. See Maher, Lawyers Are Doctors, Too 92 ABAJ 24 (2006). The analysis usually turns on whether the issuing ethics committee determines that the use of the term would be false or misleading under their state version of Rule 7.1 Communications Concerning a Lawyer’s Services of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Rule 7.1 states:
A lawyer shall not make a false or misleading communication about the lawyer or the lawyer's services. A communication is false or misleading if it contains a material misrepresentation of fact or law, or omits a fact necessary to make the statement considered as a whole not materially misleading.
The Ethics Committee of the Texas Supreme Court issued opinion 550 (2004) on this topic in which it withdrew an earlier opinion that had prohibited lawyers from referring to themselves as “Doctor” or “Dr.” and concluded:
The Committee is of the opinion that under the Rules the use of the title "Dr.," "Doctor," "J.D." or "Doctor of Jurisprudence" is not, in itself, prohibited as constituting a false or misleading communication. The Committee recognizes that other professions, such as educators, economists and social scientists, traditionally use title "Dr." in their professional names to denote a level of advanced education and not to imply formal medical training. There is no reason in these circumstances to prohibit lawyers with a Juris Doctor or Doctor of Jurisprudence degree from indicating the advanced level of their education.
However, while use of the title alone is generally permitted, the context in which the title is used may cause use of the title to be a false or misleading communication. For example, a lawyer otherwise qualified to use the title of "Dr." who advertises as "Dr. John Doe" in a public advertisement for legal services in connection with medical malpractice or other areas involving specialized medical issues may be making a misleading statement as to the lawyer's qualifications and may be creating an unjustified expectation about results the lawyer can achieve. Unless accompanied by an appropriate, prominent statement of qualifications and disclaimers, such use of the title "Dr." could readily mislead prospective clients and thus violate the Rules. Compare Comment 2 to Rule 7.02.
Other older state bar opinions on this topic are mixed. Citations to these opinions, along with excerpts from digests of them as they appear in the ABA/BNA Lawyers’ Manual on Professional Conduct follow.
Opinions that permit the use of the term include Florida Opinion 88-2 (1988) (A lawyer may use the term “Juris Doctor” on letterhead and business cards but use of the term in advertisements must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis to determine if it is misleading in each context.), New Jersey Op. 461 (1980) (The holder of a J.D. degree who is admitted to the bar of the State of New Jersey, may use that degree and the title “Doctor” since the degree indicates his training in the law.), New York State—Suffolk County Opinion 87-6 (A lawyer who has earned a juris doctor degree may use the title “doctor” professionally and/or socially), South Carolina Opinion 76-02 (1976) (An attorney may use “J.D.” or “Juris Doctor” on professional stationery and cards. He may also use and permit others to use the title “Doctor” in reference to himself.)
State Bar opinions that do not approve of the use of the term include Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar Opinion 5 (1979) (Licensed attorney who holds a J.D. degree practices both domestic relations as a lawyer and mental health counselor. May not style himself “doctor” on the basis of a J.D. degree. “Regular use of the title “doctor” is almost exclusively confined to certain health professionals” and “to some extent, academics with a Ph.D. degree and clergymen.” The lay person hearing an attorney referred to as doctor would assume the attorney were also qualified in one of these professions), Michigan Opinion CI-1176 (1988) (A lawyer who has received a “Juris Doctor” degree may use the title of “Doctor” as long as it is not misleading, fraudulent, or deceptive to the public or clients.), North Carolina Opinion 5 (January 16,1986) (A lawyer with a juris doctor degree may not hold himself out to the public as having a doctorate or use the title “doctor.” The use of such terms without explanation could be misleading.)
ABA Opinions
There are older ABA ethics opinions on this topic. ABA Formal Opinion 321 (1969) prohibited lawyers from using the term, stating that to do so would violate the rule against “self laudation” as delineated in Canon 27 of the 1908 ABA Canons of Professional Ethics. Opinion 321 did however permit a lawyer to refer to himself as “doctor” in academic circles. The Committee subsequently reversed its general position against the use of the term in later informal opinions. See, ABA Informal Opinions 1151 and 1152 (1970). Informal Opinion 1152 stated:
You have inquired of the Committee whether under the Code of Professional Responsibility an individual possessing LL.B and LL.M. degrees is entitled to the use of the term 'Doctor.' DR 2-102(F) permits the use by a lawyer of 'an earned degree or title derived therefrom indicating his training in the law.' This clearly permits the use of the term 'Doctor' by the holder of a J.D. degree, and as a LL.M. degree indicates a more advanced stage of training in the law than does a J.D. degree, it is the opinion of the Committee that under this language the holder of such a degree would be entitled to use and permit the use of the term 'Doctor' in connection with his name. – ABA Informal Opinion 1152.
I believe the same principle applies to other professions as well. For example, a couple of years ago there was a long running radio advertisement for some miracle diet product. The company president and/or spokesman, "Dr." so and so, explained how the diet product allegedly worked. However, the spokeman was not a medical doctor, but had a doctorate in psychology. The appropriate authorities required that the advertisement be revised to state that the spokesman had a degree in psychology (that is, was not a medical doctor). This makes sense because the typical listener would assume that a doctor opinining about the effectiveness of a diet product would be a medical doctor, and the omission of the "of psychology" would be deceptive.
I doubt that anyone who hears of someone being referred to as "Doctor" understands that person to be a lawyer.
Query whether a person who holds himself out as a Dr. and who is in the profession of minister or pastor but has a degree in law (and not in Divinity) is not misleading the public.
I especially am offended when a person (by his own admission) betrayed the public trust as a prosecuting attorney and as a result was sentenced to federal prison for 50 years for insurance fraud, large scale narcotics distribution and other crimes then tries to call himself a doctor because he graduated from law school.
|
Connect with Facebook
