ATTORNEY ADVERTISING

Virginia Supreme Court found that a lawyer’s blogs containing public information about cases handled by the lawyer is entitled to First Amendment protection

Date 02/26/2013.

On February 28, 2013, the Supreme Court of Virginia found that a lawyer’s blog can be considered potentially misleading commercial speech – and thus lawyer advertising – and be regulated by the Virginia State Bar. The posts predominately described cases handled by the lawyer himself where he had received a favorable result for his client. […]

Consiglio Nazionale Forense (Italian Bar Association) Decision no. 2013-72 (N. 226/10 R.G.)

Date 02/20/2013.

February 20, 2013 (published May 7, 2013)   Topic: Attorney advertisement Digest of the Committee: “Il Consiglio territoriale ha congruamente evidenziato come il titolo e l’oggetto della pubblicazione incriminata, il titolo dell’articolo e la forma dell’intervista non consentivano al lettore di percepire con immediatezza di trovarsi al cospetto di una informazione pubblicitaria; laddove, invece, il […]

Nathan M. Crystal, Ethics Watch: The Year in Review (2012)

Date 01/31/2013.

South Carolina Lawyer 8 (January 2013) Originally published as Ethics Watch: The Year in Review (2012), South Carolina Lawyer 8 (January 2013) Author reviews the most important developments in technology and ethics around the country in 2012: (i) Advertising – legal information websites; (ii) Advertising – misrepresentation on websites; (iii) Attorney-client relationship – formation and obligations […]

South Carolina State Bar Ethics Advisory Opinion 12-03

Date 12/31/2012.

Ethics Advisory Committee Topic: Lawyers’ participation in “Questions and Answers” websites is allowed with some precautions In Ethics Advisory Opinion 12-03, the Ethics Advisory Committee opined whether lawyer may answer legal questions as an “expert” on a topical website for compensation where the website disclaims the attorney-client privilege and cautions users against reliance on the […]

State Bar of California Formal Opinion 2012-186

Date 12/31/2012.

State Bar of California Standing Committee on Professional Responsibility and Conduct Formal Opinion 2012-186 Topic: Social media and attorney advertising Digest of the Committee: “Material posted by an attorney on a social media website will be subject to professional responsibility rules and standards governing attorney advertising if that material constitutes a ‘communication’ within the meaning of […]

Alabama State Bar Opinion 2012-01

Date 12/31/2012.

Office of General Counsel Formal Opinion Topic: Lawyers’ Use of Deal-of-the-Day Marketing Programs From the Opinion: use of daily deal websites, such as Groupon, violates or potentially violates a number of rules of professional conduct. Rules: 1.1; 1.15(a); 1.3; 5.4 (a); 7.2 (c); 7.2 (f) Referenced Ethics Opinions: New York State Bar Opinion 897 North […]

Indiana State Bar Association Opinion 1, 2012-JDH-1

Date 12/31/2012.

Legal Ethics Committee Topic: Lawyers’ Use of Deal-of-the-Day Marketing Programs Analysis of the Committee: The Indiana State Bar Association’s Legal Ethics Committee has looked at the burgeoning group coupon forms of social media marketing. The Ethics Committee’s analysis is that such social media marketing is fraught with peril and is likely not permitted in its […]

Consiglio Nazionale Forense (Italian Bar Association) – Decision no. 2013-37

Date 12/15/2012.

December 15, 2012 (published March 15, 2013)   Topic: Attorney advertisement Holding: “I principi in tema di pubblicità di cui alla legge 248/2006 (c.d. Decreto Bersani), pur consentendo al professionista di fornire specifiche informazioni sull’attività e i servizi professionali offerti, non legittimano tuttavia una pubblicità indiscriminata avulsa dai dettami deontologici, giacché la peculiarità e la specificità […]