Super Lawyers Facts

New Jersey Supreme Court Officially Grants Review of Opinion 39

New Jersey Supreme Court Officially Grants Review of Opinion 39 and Appoints a Special Master to Develop an Evidentiary Record The New Jersey Supreme Court officially agreed to rule on the validity of Opinion 39. Before opining about the validity of the rule, the Court appointed a retired New Jersey judge to consider any evidence presented by the parties and make factual findings. The Court presumably took this step because various parties asked the Supreme Court to consider evidence that the Committee on Attorney Advertising had not considered (since the Committee did not inform any interested parties that it was making any inquiry in the first place). Since the Supreme Court is not typically cast in the role of a factfinder, it decided to appoint a factfinder. The Court could have returned the case to the Committee to flesh out the record, but it opted, instead, to enlist former Superior Court and Appellate Division judge Robert A. Fall.

FTC Objects to Proposed Louisiana Bar Association Attorney Advertising Restrictions

Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Office of Policy Planning, Bureau of Economics, Bureau of Consumer Protection, and Bureau of Competition to submitted joint comments to the Louisiana State Bar Association (LSBA) regarding proposed revisions to the rules of professional responsibility with respect to attorney advertising.  The comments express concern that "the proposed Louisiana rules would unnecessarily restrict truthful advertising by attorneys in the state."

The comments state the staff's belief the staff’s belief that deceptive advertising by lawyers should be prohibited, but that “reasonable restrictions on advertising that are specifically tailored to prevent deceptive claims in a way that preserve competition provide the optimal level of protection for consumers.”  The comments conclude that consumers benefit from robust competition among attorneys and from important price and quality information that advertising can provide: 

“Rules that unnecessarily restrict the dissemination of truthful and non-misleading information are likely to limit competition and harm consumers of legal services in Louisiana.”

The proposed rules are very similar to those recently proposed in New York State, about which the FTC submitted comments in September 2006. The FTC staff recommends that the LSBA reject or modify the proposed rules to address competitive concerns and to avoid limiting consumer choice.

Click here to download the FTC's comments to the LSBA.

NYU Professor Stephen Gillers on Use of Super Lawyers Designation

At our request, Stephen Gillers, professor at the New York University School of Law, and a nationally-renowned expert in the regulation of lawyers and professional responsibility, provided his opinion on use of the Super Lawyers designation by attorneys licensed in New York. In part, his opinion reads:

“You have asked me whether in my opinion New York lawyers listed in Super Lawyers may advertise or publicize that fact consistent with the provisions of the New York Code of Professional Responsibility (as recently amended) that address professional advertising. My answer is that they may.”

Professor Gillers cautions that attorneys should not be misleading -- that they should "make it clear that the lawyer is included or listed in Super Lawyers, not that the lawyer is presenting himself or herself as a super lawyer." He also suggests that advertisements not in the Super Lawyers publication refer to the Super Lawyers website to provide consumers a link to the selection process.

Click here to download the full text of Prof. Gillers' Opinion.

Click here to download Attachment A - Prof. Gillers' CV.

Click here to download Attachment B - excerpts from Key Professsional Media's letter to Michael Colodner (ref. in Prof. Gillers' opinion), 8/30/2006

.