# Why don't lawyers have titles? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 26, 2004, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-lawyers-have-titles/271253 "2004-10-26T16:26:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-lawyers-have-titles/271253/21 "2004-10-26T23:08:51Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > Attorney John Jones > John Jones, Esq. But perhaps it should be pointed out that ‘Esq.’ originally had nothing to do with lawyers per se, but was simply a young man in service to a knight, as part of his own knighthood training. Later it became a word designating a social rank above the common herd but below Knights, and from there it spread a bit further to anyone who could reasonably be considered a “gentleman”. I’ve heard it preposterously referred to as an ‘E-S-Q’, as if it were a law degree. But as I said, the original usage had nothing to do with lawyers so it shouldn’t be thought of as a **title** in the way that “doctor” is. ---
**Author:** ![ltfire](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@ltfire](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ltfire)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2004, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-lawyers-have-titles/271253/22 "2004-10-26T23:45:38Z")
I’d hate to tell you what I call my former lawyer… :wally …and, much more. ---
**Author:** ![Misnomer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/misnomer/32/14897_2.png) [@Misnomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Misnomer)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-lawyers-have-titles/271253/23 "2004-10-27T01:55:11Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > Speaking as a lawyer, I disagree with this definition. > > A “lawyer” is someone who is licensed to practise law. Just because you have a law degree doesn’t mean you’re a lawyer. > > An “attorney” is a representative, a deputy, or an agent. An “attorney at law” is someone’s lawyer. Good correction about a lawyer requiring a license and not just a law degree; I’m tempted to e-mail Bill Walsh and point this out to him! However, I think that the distinction between “attorney” and “attorney-at-law” (however valid) begs the question of Walsh’s point: you would still never be _a New York attorney-at-law_ or just _an attorney-at-law_. So using either “attorney” _or_ “attorney-at-law” as a title remains incorrect: you may be a lawyer all of the time, but you are only an attorney (-at-law or -in-fact) while you are representing someone. Yes? No? Should I plead the Fifth? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-lawyers-have-titles/271253/24 "2004-10-27T02:06:17Z")
> [@Northern Piper](#): > > “Mettre” is the French verb for “to place”. Or to stick it to someone. Hmmm . . . . perhaps it is not too far off after all. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Billdo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/billdo/32/315_2.png) [@Billdo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Billdo)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-lawyers-have-titles/271253/25 "2004-10-27T02:39:19Z")
> [@overlyverbose](#): > > I was under the impression that it’s illegal to practice law in the U.S. without being licensed to do so, and that, in most places in the U.S., licensing requires that you have the appropriate education. > > Is that not the case? Yes, it is illegal to practice law in the U.S. without being licensed in the state in which you are practicing. Each U.S. State has different requirements for the education necessary for bar admission. The American Bar Association has published the [Comprehensive Guide to Bar Admission](http://www.abanet.org/legaled/publications/2004comguide/compguide2004.html). The Guide’s [Chart 3 (pdf file)](http://www.abanet.org/legaled/publications/2004comguide/chart3.pdf) lists the requirements for education for each U.S. jurisdiction. ---
**Author:** ![Hey\_It\_s\_That\_Guy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Hey\_It\_s\_That\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hey_It_s_That_Guy)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-lawyers-have-titles/271253/26 "2004-10-27T03:58:56Z")
So what should I be calling myself? I have a law degree (a Juris Doctor), but I have not passed the Bar Exam yet. I’ve never gotten a straight answer for this post-law school “stuck in the middle” period. ---
**Author:** ![Hadrian0117](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Hadrian0117](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hadrian0117)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 4:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-lawyers-have-titles/271253/27 "2004-10-27T04:08:11Z")
> [@Big Bad Voodoo Lou](#): > > So what should I be calling myself? I have a law degree (a Juris Doctor), but I have not passed the Bar Exam yet. I’ve never gotten a straight answer for this post-law school “stuck in the middle” period. Big Lou, JD ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [October 27, 2004, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-lawyers-have-titles/271253/28 "2004-10-27T13:36:59Z")
> [@overlyverbose](#): > > I was under the impression that it’s illegal to practice law in the U.S. without being licensed to do so, and that, in most places in the U.S., licensing requires that you have the appropriate education. > > Is that not the case? It is the case, but the point is that each state sets its own requirements for obtaining such licensure and such requirements have changed over time, _and_ the _name_ of the initial law degree has changed over time. Thus, if you take a look at all the people who are currently licensed to practise law throughout the United States, the vast majority will have obtained “J.D.” degrees, but a significant proportion of older lawyers will have “LL.B.” degrees. Some small percentage of lawyers will have managed to obtain licenses without having attended law school. > [@Spectre of Pithecanthropus](#): > > But perhaps it should be pointed out that ‘Esq.’ originally had nothing to do with lawyers per se This is an issue that has been discussed extensively on this forum. I myself find “Esq.” to be silly and pretentious, but the basic fact of the matter is that regardless of the history of the title, in the United States, “Esq.” is commonly used to indicate that the person is a lawyer. > [@](#): > > But as I said, the original usage had nothing to do with lawyers so it shouldn’t be thought of as a **title** in the way that “doctor” is. In fact, it is rather similar to “doctor,” in that there is nothing about the _title_ doctor that makes it an indicator of physicians. It’s only through common (mis-)use of the title that has resulted in “physician”\<=\>“doctor.” > [@Misnomer](#): > > Good correction about a lawyer requiring a license and not just a law degree; I’m tempted to e-mail Bill Walsh and point this out to him! Generally, I agree with Walsh, but I think here he is wrong. Please, message him. > [@](#): > > However, I think that the distinction between “attorney” and “attorney-at-law” (however valid) begs the question of Walsh’s point: you would still never be _a New York attorney-at-law_ or just _an attorney-at-law_. So using either “attorney” _or_ “attorney-at-law” as a title remains incorrect: you may be a lawyer all of the time, but you are only an attorney (-at-law or -in-fact) while you are representing someone. This is more or less like the “Esq.” issue. Yes, technically it’s wrong, but after a while you get tired of correcting _everyone_. > [@Big Bad Voodoo Lou](#): > > So what should I be calling myself? I have a law degree (a Juris Doctor), but I have not passed the Bar Exam yet. I’ve never gotten a straight answer for this post-law school “stuck in the middle” period. You’re a “law school graduate.” Simple. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-dont-lawyers-have-titles/271253.md?page=1)