Claris Law Legal Blogging Community

Name:

E-mail:

Phone Number:

Zip Code:

Your Question:

Editor: Ben W. Glass
Profession: Attorney at Law

Category: Ethics and Regulation

A groundbreaking case has made news today in New York, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has declared most of the content-based attorney advertising rules unconstitutional. The rules had prohibited client testimonials relating to pending cases, "portrayals of judges or fictitious law firms, attention-getting techniques unrelated to attorney competence, and trade names or nicknames that imply an ability to get results."

The new rules also created a thirty-day waiting period after a specific incident, before attorneys could solicit personal injury clients through targeted television advertisements and other media. The Circuit Court did uphold this thirty-day moratorium.

The Circuit Court ruled that some of the content restrictions violated the First Amendment, including the ban on client testimonials on pending matters and using nicknames. However, the appellate panel did rule that the use of a "fictitious name to refer to lawyers not associated together in a law firm" or "implying that lawyers are associated in a law firm" when they are not, was in fact, misleading and therefore not protected under the First Amendment.

To learn more about this ruling, visit our website at http://www.greatlegalmarketing.com/library/Cahill_appellate_decision.pdf.

Thank you Great Legal Marketing member, Jim Reed of the Ziff Law Firm, for notifying us of this case!