Top Law Schools

What is the Difference Between JD and ESQ?

The J.D. is a degree. Esquire is a title. Kind of like how a D.D.S. is a degree, and Doctor is a title.

There are many J.D. degree holders who aren't lawyers and thus can't ethically use the "Esquire" title. Conversely, there are also many lawyers who may use the "Esquire" title who don't hold J.D.s.

Back in feudal england, an esquire was a lesser title of nobility, just above gentleman. It was traditionally given to:
1) those who bear an office of trust under the crown (e.g. judges, sheriffs, government officials)
2) the eldest born of a lower title (baron or knight)
3) the eldest sons of the younger sons of a senior title (duke, earl)

Note: The eldest born of a Baron would be an esquire until the baron passed away and the title passed by succession. The children of higher-ranked nobility would use the family's lesser titles, if available, or a title designating the relationship (Marques, Viscount). Children who were not in the direct line of succession were given the hereditary title of esquire. Likewise, the eldest child of a knight would be an esquire (Knight being an earned title).

important professions like judges, sheriffs, etc. would usually be granted through family connections, so #1 above would usually be comprised of #3 above.
Toward the later days of the feudal system, there was a greater distinction between Esquire by Birth and Esquire by Title.

The use of the title Esquire was quite common by colonial times, typically being an honorific for members of the court and government officials. With the expulsion of the English government officials and the abolition of hereditary titles in the U.S., the only esquires left were attorneys and judges. Over time, in the U.S. esquire came to be a honorific title for attorneys.

Juris Doctor is a degree from a university, which means doctor of law. Historically, a Doctor degree was given to those qualified to teach the subject at university. It is higher than a bachelor or a master. In many countries, law is an undergraduate degree (llb), followed by an apprenticeship of some sorts (known as a clerkship). In the U.S., the undergraduate law degree has been abolished, and law can only be studied as a secondary degree.
For some reason, the master of law degree (llm) comes after the JD, which I believe is unique, as for every other study, the progression is bachelor -> master -> doctor. I have no idea why this is the .

In modern usage, J.D. refers to the degree, or the holder of the degree, while Esq. is an honorific title given to the practitioner.

QContinuum wrote:The J.D. is a degree. Esquire is a title. Kind of like how a D.D.S. is a degree, and Doctor is a title.

There are many J.D. degree holders who aren't lawyers and thus can't ethically use the "Esquire" title. Conversely, there are also many lawyers who may use the "Esquire" title who don't hold J.D.s.

Note: in some states, it's ethically permissible for a lawyer to use the title "Doctor".
A few years ago I pissed off one of my cousins who was very proud of being a doctor (of Philosophy, mind you) by telling him that I too, technically, was a doctor.

FND wrote:For some reason, the master of law degree (llm) comes after the JD, which I believe is unique, as for every other study, the progression is bachelor -> master -> doctor. I have no idea why this is the .

As best as I can tell, this is a relic of when U.S. law schools awarded LL.B.s instead of J.D.s (which they did up through the 1960s). While LL.B.s were renamed J.D.s, LL.M.s were not renamed. Interestingly, in order of procession at commencement, the J.D. degree, as a doctoral degree, generally precedes the LL.M., as a Master's degree. This is so even though students must earn a J.D. before they may study for an LL.M. Truly a convoluted system*.

The undisputed "highest" U.S. legal degree (though one that hasn't really caught on, not even in legal academia) is the J.S.D., the Doctor of Juridical Science. This is a research-based degree that resembles a traditional Ph.D. much more than the coursework-based J.D., which is commonly classified as a "professional doctorate" (like the M.D., D.O., O.D., D.D.S., etc. degrees).

*A similar convoluted system would likely have existed in medicine as well, but for U.S. medical schools no longer granting any medical degrees beyond the M.D. (the renamed MB, or Bachelor of Medicine). UK medical schools, which continue to grant the MB as the first medical degree, grant the M.D. as a research-based doctorate (like the J.S.D. in law).

FND wrote:Note: in some states, it's ethically permissible for a lawyer to use the title "Doctor".
A few years ago I pissed off one of my cousins who was very proud of being a doctor (of Philosophy, mind you) by telling him that I too, technically, was a doctor.

In your cousin's defense, the Ph.D., as a research doctorate, does rank "above" professional doctorates like the J.D. or M.D. In Australia, for instance, U.S. J.D./M.D./etc. degrees are treated as Master's degrees, while U.S. Ph.D.s are treated as doctorates. And, going back to ancient history, the use of the title "Doctor" as an academic title was originally reserved to holders of research doctorates, i.e., Ph.D.s.

That said, the J.D. is literally "Juris Doctor", so tradition notwithstanding, J.D.s have just as much claim on the title of "Doctor" as, say, dentists. It's funny how many who get bent out of shape over the use of "Doctor" by lawyers ("it's deceptive, "doctor" means "medical doctor"!") have zero objection to the use of "Doctor" by Ph.D. holders or dentists or optometrists.

QContinuum wrote:

FND wrote:Note: in some states, it's ethically permissible for a lawyer to use the title "Doctor".
A few years ago I pissed off one of my cousins who was very proud of being a doctor (of Philosophy, mind you) by telling him that I too, technically, was a doctor.

In your cousin's defense, the Ph.D., as a research doctorate, does rank "above" professional doctorates like the J.D. or M.D. In Australia, for instance, U.S. J.D./M.D./etc. degrees are treated as Master's degrees, while U.S. Ph.D.s are treated as doctorates. And, going back to ancient history, the use of the title "Doctor" as an academic title was originally reserved to holders of research doctorates, i.e., Ph.D.s.

That said, the J.D. is literally "Juris Doctor", so tradition notwithstanding, J.D.s have just as much claim on the title of "Doctor" as, say, dentists. It's funny how many who get bent out of shape over the use of "Doctor" by lawyers ("it's deceptive, "doctor" means "medical doctor"!") have zero objection to the use of "Doctor" by Ph.D. holders or dentists or optometrists.

Nah, my cousin was being a jackass toward my brother, who at the time was an MD and was finishing up his PhD as well. for some reason he never considered my brother his intellectual equal.

FND wrote:Nah, my cousin was being a jackass toward my brother, who at the time was an MD and was finishing up his PhD as well. for some reason he never considered my brother his intellectual equal.

That's hilarious. Your bro has the strongest claim of all to the "Doctor" title, as both a Ph.D. and a medical doctor!

QContinuum wrote:

FND wrote:Nah, my cousin was being a jackass toward my brother, who at the time was an MD and was finishing up his PhD as well. for some reason he never considered my brother his intellectual equal.

That's hilarious. Your bro has the strongest claim of all to the "Doctor" title, as both a Ph.D. and a medical doctor!

And both before he turned thirty.

On a related note: in modern usage, it's pretty gauche to refer to yourself as "esquire." You typically only see low-end practitioners using the term to refer to themselves (in correspondence or advertising). However, it's often used as a polite address in formal correspondence to a lawyer, but usually only in a law related setting (like an invitation to a formal bar event).

I would also add that while some states may technically allow you to refer to yourself as "doctor" without violating ethical rules, any lawyer calling themselves "doctor" will be met with an immediate

nealric wrote:On a related note: in modern usage, it's pretty gauche to refer to yourself as "esquire." You typically only see low-end practitioners using the term to refer to themselves (in correspondence or advertising). However, it's often used as a polite address in formal correspondence to a lawyer, but usually only in a law related setting (like an invitation to a formal bar event).

I would also add that while some states may technically allow you to refer to yourself as "doctor" without violating ethical rules, any lawyer calling themselves "doctor" will be met with an immediate

A lot of attorneys who deal with the general public use Esq. Some of them do it just because they want the title, but to Joe Public it still makes a difference

QContinuum wrote:The J.D. is a degree. Esquire is a title. Kind of like how a D.D.S. is a degree, and Doctor is a title. There are many J.D. degree holders who aren't lawyers and thus can't ethically use the "Esquire" title. Conversely, there are also many lawyers who may use the "Esquire" title who don't hold J.D.s.

1. "Doctor" differs from "Esquire" In that it is a title obtained from having a doctoral degree.
2. Lawyers should not use the "Esquire" title to refer to themselves. It is to be used by lawyers and by others when addressing correspondence to lawyers.

FND wrote:
For some reason, the master of law degree (llm) comes after the JD, which I believe is unique, as for every other study, the progression is bachelor -> master -> doctor. I have no idea why this is the .

The original American progression was LL.B., LL.M., J.S.D. The current American progression is J.D., LL.M., J.S.D.

FND wrote:

QContinuum wrote:The J.D. is a degree. Esquire is a title. Kind of like how a D.D.S. is a degree, and Doctor is a title.

There are many J.D. degree holders who aren't lawyers and thus can't ethically use the "Esquire" title. Conversely, there are also many lawyers who may use the "Esquire" title who don't hold J.D.s.

Note: in some states, it's ethically permissible for a lawyer to use the title "Doctor".

1. Lawyers should not use the "Esquire" title to refer to themselves. It is to be used by lawyers and by others when addressing correspondence to lawyers.
2. In the vast majority of states, "it's ethically permissible for a lawyer to use the title 'Doctor.'"

QContinuum wrote:

FND wrote:
And, going back to ancient history, the use of the title "Doctor" as an academic title was originally reserved to holders of research doctorates, i.e., Ph.D.s.

Actually, the Juris Doctor degree was created in Italy hundreds of years ago, so use of the title Doctor originated before the Medicinae Doctor degree even existed.

QContinuum wrote:

FND wrote: Your bro has the strongest claim of all to the "Doctor" title, as ... a medical doctor!

M.D. does not stand for Medical Doctor. It stands for Medicinae Doctor or Doctor of Medicine.

nealric wrote:
I would also add that ... any lawyer calling themselves "doctor" will be met with an immediate

I find it odd that almost no lawyers ever put J.D. after their names. Perhaps this is a relic from the time when lawyers received the LL.B. instead of the J.D.

Did you really have to make 6 separate posts in a row?

legalace wrote:1. "Doctor" differs from "Esquire" In that it is a title obtained from having a doctoral degree.

In colloquial usage, "doctor" is a title obtained from having a license to practice medicine as a physician (i.e., a "medical doctor", but of course the "medical" prefix is typically omitted). In the U.S., foreign-trained physicians without an M.D. or any other doctoral degree are still called "doctor".

legalace wrote:M.D. does not stand for Medical Doctor. It stands for Medicinae Doctor or Doctor of Medicine.

I never said M.D. stands for "Medical Doctor". I said someone who holds both a M.D. and a Ph.D. has the strongest claim of all to the "Doctor" title. The M.D.-Ph.D. holder has a historically-rooted claim to the title by virtue of holding a research doctorate, and an ordinary usage-rooted claim by virtue of being a physician (assuming the holder is, in fact, licensed to practice medicine - not all M.D.-Ph.D.s are licensed physicians).

legalace wrote:I find it odd that almost no lawyers ever put J.D. after their names. Perhaps this is a relic from the time when lawyers received the LL.B. instead of the J.D.

I think the lawyers who care to append a suffix on a business card or street sign prefer the historically-rooted "Esq." suffix, as that is more well-known to laypeople than the "J.D." degree. It's a pure marketing decision. I'm sure if "J.D." was as well-known to laypeople as "M.D.", the "Esq." suffix would be going the way of the dodo.

Thank you for your answers.

Ricardos wrote:Thank you for your answers.

By the way, I found an interesting article about What is the Difference Between JD and ESQ? | Differencebtwn

QContinuum wrote:

legalace wrote:I find it odd that almost no lawyers ever put J.D. after their names. Perhaps this is a relic from the time when lawyers received the LL.B. instead of the J.D.

I think the lawyers who care to append a suffix on a business card or street sign prefer the historically-rooted "Esq." suffix, as that is more well-known to laypeople than the "J.D." degree. It's a pure marketing decision. I'm sure if "J.D." was as well-known to laypeople as "M.D.", the "Esq." suffix would be going the way of the dodo.

Yeah, this. unfortunately, I need to append Esq. to my name for marketing purposes, for the 5% of potential customers who give a shit. I hate it, but I don't want to lose out on a client because I don't have it.

Ricardos wrote:

Ricardos wrote:Thank you for your answers.

By the way, I found an interesting article about What is the Difference Between JD and ESQ? | Differencebtwn

there are so many things wrong with this article it make my head spin. I wouldn't be surprised if it was written by a middle-schooler without access to a computer.