Virginia law firm sues over ad restrictions

By The Associated Press

09.09.02

Printer-friendly page

RICHMOND, Va. — Calling yourself the best is a no-no under the legal rules that govern advertising by lawyers.

Saying that someone else thinks you're the best doesn't make it any better, the Virginia State Bar's Standing Committee on Lawyer Advertising and Solicitation ruled.

The Richmond law firm of Allen, Allen, Allen & Allen, which thinks it is the best, as well as the largest, personal injury firm in the state, disagrees with the committee and is taking its case to federal court.

The firm filed a lawsuit last week alleging that the interpretation of the rule on lawyer advertising violates the First Amendment.

In a television ad last year, the Allen firm said that three of the four plaintiffs' personal injury lawyers listed in the book The Best Lawyers in America are in the firm. "If you've been injured, call the lawyers other lawyers have called the best. Allen, Allen, Allen & Allen. The strength of family. The best in personal injury."

Five competitors of the Allen firm filed a complaint with the State Bar committee contending that the advertisement was "false, deceptive and misleading."

The committee agreed.

"Statements that use extravagant or self-laudatory words are designed to and in fact mislead laypersons to whom they are directed and, as such, undermine public confidence in our legal system," the committee ruled this summer.

W. Coleman Allen Jr., president of the firm, said it hired Thomas W. Williamson Jr., the fourth personal-injury lawyer listed in the book, and Rodney A. Smolla, a University of Richmond law professor and First Amendment expert, to challenge the committee's ruling.

Smolla told the Richmond Times-Dispatch that the committee started from a faulty and overly broad premise that there is "something inherently wrong in a lawyer engaging in any self-laudatory advertising."

Marketing by its nature is self-laudatory, he added, and "we generally say if it's truthful information, people are allowed to promote it." He noted that many of the 487 Virginia lawyers listed in the book cite the listing on resumes and Web sites.

By the committee's logic, all those lawyers violate the legal rule, Smolla said.

Thomas A. Edmonds, executive director of the State Bar, said the committee's opinion was merely advisory.

"Our committee is certainly going to take a look at the lawsuit, take another look at the opinion, and then we'll decide whether we have a defensible opinion to stand behind or whether it needs some further work," Edmonds said. "It can be withdrawn and revised and reissued if need be."

Related

Lawyers' dramatic TV ads don't make cut for federal judge
Court agrees with N.C. State Bar that spots for law firms were misleading, not constitutionally protected commercial speech.  07.25.01

Lawyer prevails in dispute with Florida Bar over Yellow Page ad
Orlando attorney Steven Mason says he feels 'vindicated' by federal appeals panel's ruling.  04.14.00

Legal experts give lawyer ads mixed reviews
Analysis 'Sometimes free speech is not always in the best taste,' says Connecticut law professor.  11.11.02

Group says court ruling on ads for lawyers is wrong
Lawyers to challenge prohibitions against dramatizations, testimonials.  06.21.99

Court wrangle continues over Florida law forbidding attorney solicitation
Case could determine constitutionality of a state law banning all forms of attorney advertising related to automobile accident cases.  12.23.98

N.C. State Bar drops plan to limit attorney ads
Move came after a federal appeals court ruled last year that a similar ban in Maryland robbed letter-writing lawyers of their right to free speech.  11.02.98