Title: Amendments to Rules Regulating the Florida Bar - Advertising Rules, Corrected Opinion

State: florida

Issuer: Florida Supreme Court

Document:

Supreme Court of Florida
 
____________
No. 92,297
____________
AMENDMENTS TO RULES REGULATING THE FLORIDA BAR–
ADVERTISING RULES
CORRECTED OPINION
[December 17, 1999]
PER CURIAM.
The Florida Bar has petitioned this Court to amend the Rules Regulating
The Florida Bar relating to attorney advertising.  Notice of the proposed
amendments was published in The Florida Bar News, and this Court has received
a number of comments in response.  We have jurisdiction.  See art. V, § 15, Fla.
Const.
Based in large part upon recommendations from The Florida Bar’s Joint
Presidential Advertising Task Force (Task Force), the Bar has proposed creating
rules 3-1.3 (Lawyers Admitted in Jurisdictions Other Than Florida) and 15-1.2
(Applicability), both of which relate to this Court’s disciplinary authority over
1Specifically, the Bar proposes amending or creating:  rule 4-7.1 (General); rule 4-7.2
(Communications Concerning a Lawyer’s Services); rule 4-7.3 (Advertisements in the Public Print
Media); rule 4-7.4 (Direct Contact with Prospective Clients); rule 4-7.5 (Advertisements in the
Electronic Media, Other than Computer-Accessed Communications); rule 4-7.6 (Computer-
Accessed Communications); rule 4-7.7 (Evaluation of Advertisements); rule 4-7.8 (Exemptions
From the Filing and Review Requirement); rule 4-7.9 (Information About a Lawyer’s Services
Provided Upon Request); rule 4-7.10 (Firm Names and Letterhead); and rule 4-7.11 (Lawyer
Referral Services).
-2-
non-Florida attorneys who solicit or advertise for legal employment in Florida. 
The remainder of the Bar’s proposed amendments pertain to a comprehensive
“overhaul” of subchapter 4-7 (Information About Legal Services).1  We have
received comments and held oral argument on the Bar's petition.
We here discuss some of the proposed changes.  We follow this opinion
with an appendix which includes changes to the rules which we hereby adopt.
Proposed Rule 3-1.3; Rule 15-1.2
In its petition, the Bar proposes rule 3-1.3 (Lawyers Admitted in
Jurisdictions Other Than Florida), a new rule which provides in pertinent part that
“lawyers, whether or not admitted to practice law in Florida, who solicit or
advertise for legal employment in Florida or who target solicitations or
advertisements for legal employment at Florida residents . . . must do so only in
accordance with the applicable provisions of these Rules Regulating The Florida
Bar.”  (Emphasis added.)  Proposed rule 15-1.2 (Applicability) concomitantly
subjects such lawyers to this Court’s advertising rules and procedures if they
2Exceptions to this generalization may apply when, for example, attorneys admitted in
other jurisdictions are granted permission to appear pro hac vice in particular cases or
proceedings in Florida courts.  See R. Regulating Fla. Bar 1-3.2(a) (Members in Good Standing)
("A practicing attorney of another state, in good standing, who has professional business in a
court of record of this state may, upon motion, be permitted to practice for the purpose of such
business upon such conditions as the court deems appropriate under the circumstances of the
case.”); see also Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.060(b) (Foreign Attorneys) (providing that “[a]ttorneys of
other states shall not engage in a general practice in Florida unless they are members of The
Florida Bar in good standing,” but allowing that, upon verified motion, “attorneys of other states
may be permitted to appear in particular cases in a Florida court”); see generally Huff v. State,
569 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 1990) (discussing discretion of court in ruling on motions to admit pro hac
vice). Even then, however, our jurisdiction over such attorneys is limited, as set forth in Rule
Regulating the Florida Bar 3-4.1 (“Notice and Knowledge of Rules”):
Every member of The Florida Bar and every attorney of another state who
is admitted to practice for the purpose of a specific case before a court of record of
this state is within the jurisdiction of this court and its agencies under this rule and
-3-
“disseminate advertisements within Florida or target advertisements at Florida
residents.”  The Bar advises that these proposed rules stem directly from the
offensive and improper practices of some non-Florida attorneys who converged on
the survivors of those killed in the ValuJet airplane crash in the Everglades in May
of 1996.
We deny the adoption of these proposed rules, as they essentially treat
lawyers admitted in other jurisdictions like members of The Florida Bar for the
limited purpose of subjecting them to the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar
regarding solicitation and advertising.  We find the proposed rules unnecessary. 
Out-of-state lawyers are not lawyers who are subject to the Rules Regulating the
Florida Bar;2 rather, they are "nonlawyers" subject to chapter 10 unlicensed
is charged with notice and held to know the provisions of this rule and the
standards of ethical and professional conduct prescribed by this court.  Jurisdiction
over an attorney of another state who is not a member of The Florida Bar shall be
limited to conduct as an attorney in relation to the business for which the attorney
was permitted to practice in this state and the privilege in the future to practice law
in the state of Florida.
(Emphasis added.)
-4-
practice of law charges if they, among other things, engage in improper solicitation
or advertising in Florida.
Specifically, chapter 10 of the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar (Rules
Governing the Investigation and Prosecution of the Unlicensed Practice of Law),
provides that “[p]ursuant to the provisions of article V, section 15, of the Florida
Constitution, the Supreme Court of Florida has inherent jurisdiction to prohibit the
unlicensed practice of law” by nonlawyers.  R. Regulating Fla. Bar 10-1.1
(Jurisdiction); see Florida Bar v. Schramek, 616 So. 2d 979, 982 (Fla. 1993)
(rejecting nonlawyer’s argument that this Court’s jurisdiction to regulate the
practice of law extends only to licensed attorneys); Florida Bar v. Moses, 380 So.
2d 412, 417 (Fla. 1980) (“Inherent in our supervisory power is the authority to
prohibit the unauthorized practice of law.”).  Chapter 10 explicitly defines
“nonlawyer or nonattorney” as “an individual who is not a member of The Florida
Bar . . . [including] lawyers admitted in other jurisdictions.”  R. Regulating Fla.
Bar 10-2.1(b) (Nonlawyer or Nonattorney) (emphasis added); cf. Preamble to ch.
3For example, section 454.23, Florida Statutes (1997), provides:
Penalties.–Any person not licensed or otherwise authorized by the
Supreme Court of Florida who shall practice law or assume or hold himself or
herself out to the public as qualified to practice in this state, or who willfully
pretends to be, or willfully takes or uses any name, title, addition, or description
implying that he or she is qualified, or recognized by law as qualified, to act as a
lawyer in this state . . . shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree . . . .
See State v. Foster, 674 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 1st DCA) (upholding constitutionality of section
454.23), review dismissed, 677 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 1996); see also § 877.02, Fla. Stat. (1997)
(lawyer anti-solicitation statute); Carricarte v. State, 384 So. 2d 1261 (Fla. 1980) (upholding
constitutionality of section 877.02).
4 For example, Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 4-5.5 (Unlicensed Practice of Law)
provides:
A lawyer shall not:
(a) practice law in a jurisdiction where doing so violates the regulation of
the legal profession in that jurisdiction; or
(b) assist a person who is not a member of the bar in the performance of
activity that constitutes the unlicensed practice of law.
-5-
4, R. Regulating Fla. Bar (A Lawyer’s Responsibilities) (“‘Lawyer’ denotes a
person who is a member of The Florida Bar or otherwise authorized to practice in
any court of the State of Florida.”).  Chapter 10 further defines the “unlicensed
practice of law” as “the practice of law, as prohibited by statute,[3] court rule,[4]
and case law of the State of Florida.”  R. Regulating Fla. Bar 10-2.1(a)
(Unlicensed Practice of Law).
Our case law is clear that improper solicitation or advertising in Florida by
lawyers admitted in other jurisdictions is prohibited as the unlicensed practice of
law.  For example, in Florida Bar v. Kaiser, 397 So. 2d 1132, 1133 (Fla. 1981), the
5Florida Bar v. Savitt, 363 So. 2d 559 (Fla. 1978), involved unlicensed practice of law
charges against an interstate law firm with its principal office in New York and a partner of that
firm who, although not a member of The Florida Bar, supervised the Miami office of the firm. 
This Court adopted and approved the parties’ joint motion and stipulation for settlement which, as
pertinent to the present case, provided that “in any telephone directory published and used in
Florida, the firm shall list only its lawyers who are admitted to practice in Florida,” and that “a
professional card of a lawyer identifying him by name and as a lawyer, giving his address, may not
contain a Florida address if he is not a member of The Florida Bar.”  Id. at 561-62.
-6-
referee found a New York attorney guilty of the unauthorized practice of law for
implying in telephone-book, television, and newspaper advertising that he was
authorized to practice law in Florida.  In concluding that the referee’s findings of
fact regarding the unauthorized practice of law were justified, this Court held:
The record supports the referee’s conclusion that [the New York
attorney at issue] knew that his advertisements created the impression
that he was authorized to practice in Florida on his own, and did not
meet the requirements of our most recent pronouncement with respect
to the interstate practice of law.  See The Florida Bar v. Savitt, 363
So. 2d 559 (Fla. 1978).[5]
 . . . .
Accordingly [the New York attorney at issue] is hereby
enjoined from any advertising by newspaper, television or otherwise
that would tend to mislead the public into believing he is a member of
The Florida Bar or authorized to practice in this state . . . .
Kaiser, 397 So. 2d at 1133-34; see also Florida Bar v. Tate, 552 So. 2d 1106,
1107 (Fla. 1989) (enjoining Pennsylvania attorney from representing that he was a
member of The Florida Bar; from utilizing any cards, letterhead, or other written
material identifying him as attorney at law without otherwise specifying that he
was only admitted in Pennsylvania; and from otherwise engaging in the practice of
-7-
law in Florida); Florida Bar v. Dale, 496 So. 2d 813, 815 (Fla. 1986) (enjoining
Mississippi lawyer from impliedly or expressly holding himself out as licensed to
practice law in Florida or from describing himself as a lawyer or attorney, and
directing him to remove all indicia of his status as a lawyer from public view in his
title company offices).  We also call attention to our decision in Chandris, S.A. v.
Yanakakis, 668 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 1995), which rendered void a contingency fee
agreement entered into for pursuit of a claim in Florida by an out-of-state attorney
engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.
Additionally, of course, such lawyers remain subject to the disciplinary
authority of the jurisdictions in which they have been admitted.  As succinctly
stated in the comment to Rule Regulating The Florida Bar 4-8.5 (Jurisdiction), “In
modern practice lawyers frequently act outside the territorial limits of the
jurisdiction in which they are licensed to practice, either in another state or outside
the United States.  In doing so, they remain subject to the governing authority of
the jurisdiction in which they are licensed to practice.”  (Emphasis added.)  We
accordingly reject proposed rules 3-1.3 and 15-1.2, and suggest that the Bar
instead develop and submit for approval by this Court proposed amendments
amplifying chapter 10 and the rules concerning the unlicensed practice of law in
regard to solicitation and advertising by lawyers admitted in other jurisdictions.
-8-
Proposed Subchapter Rule 4-7
The Bar has proposed substantial revisions to subchapter 4-7 in the form of
both amendments to and a reorganization of the rules thereunder.  We generally
accept the proposed amendments and reorganization except where we specifically
reject the proposed changes.
Our decision as to the rules pertaining to advertising must be within the
boundaries of multiple United States Supreme Court decisions on these issues. 
Our decision is our determination as to the limits of constitutional regulation
absent a change in the analysis of the United States Constitution by the United
States Supreme Court as applied to this regulation.
Rule 4-7.1, in its existing form, is deleted.  Existing rule 4-7.2(a) is
essentially moved to rule 4-7.1.  We accept this change, except we find no reason
to delete "radio, television," as those words are stated in the existing rule 4-7.2(a). 
Therefore, the words "radio, television" are included in the new rule 4-7.1(a).  We
also reject the addition to the end of new rule 4-7.1(b) the phrase "and does not
concern the provision of legal services within Florida."  We conclude that this
phrase was placed in this rule to be consistent with the Bar's proposed rule 3-1.3
(Lawyers Admitted in Jurisdictions Other Than Florida), which we have rejected.
As to proposed rule 4-7.2(a)(2), the rule requires a "bona fide office,"
-9-
defined as "a physical location maintained by the lawyer or law firm where the
lawyer or law firm reasonably expects to furnish legal services in a substantial way
on a regular and continuing basis."  Comments contend that this definition of
"bona fide office" is too vague and uncertain.  We agree with the Bar that this
requirement is necessary for the protection of the public relying upon
advertisements.  We do not find the definition too facially vague or uncertain. 
This determination, of course, is without prejudice as to any contests of specific
applications.
As to proposed rule 4-7.2(c)(7), concerning payment by a nonadvertising
lawyer, we accept this provision but clarify that rule 4-1.5(f)(4)(D) (regarding
division of contingency fees) is not affected by this provision even though the
lawyer covered by rule 4-1.5(f)(4)(D)(ii) advertises.
As to rules 4-7.3 and 4-7.4, we accept the revisions proposed by the Bar.
Proposed Rule 4-7.5(b)
Proposed rule 4-7.5(b) (Appearance on Television or Radio) imposes
restrictions on attorney advertising on television and radio.  Before more
specifically discussing these restrictions, we first address comments filed by the
Task Force urging much more drastic action, to-wit, not just restrictions but a
prophylactic prohibition on attorney advertising on television and radio.
-10-
Based upon several extensive studies and surveys, the Task Force
concluded that “lawyer advertising, particularly television and radio advertising, is
not providing the public with useful information . . . and is lowering the public’s
regard for the administration of justice in our state.”  The Task Force accordingly
urged the Bar, and now urges this Court, that a complete prohibition on advertising
for legal services in the electronic media is “the only practical way to address the
problems created by television and radio advertising.”  The Bar rejected this
recommendation in its proposal to this Court; however, it is still urged by the Task
Force and in several comments submitted to this Court.  We have considered a
proposed complete ban and disagree with the Task Force's suggestion that there is
“good reason to believe that such a prohibition would withstand constitutional
challenge.”
As recently stressed by the United States Supreme Court, “[i]t is now well
established that lawyer advertising is commercial speech and, as such, is accorded
a measure of First Amendment protection.”  Florida Bar v. Went For It, Inc., 515
U.S. 618, 623 (1995).  Specifically, restrictions on commercial speech are subject
to “intermediate” scrutiny:
Under Central Hudson [Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service
Comm’n of New York, 447 U.S. 557 (1980)], the government may
freely regulate commercial speech that concerns unlawful activity or
-11-
is misleading.  Commercial speech that falls into neither of those
categories . . . may be regulated if the government satisfies a test
consisting of three related prongs:  First, the government must assert
a substantial interest in support of its regulation; second, the
government must demonstrate that the restriction on commercial
speech directly and materially advances that interest; and third, the
regulation must be “‘narrowly drawn.’”
Id. at 623-24 (citations omitted).
We do not find United States Supreme Court support for a holding that
television and radio advertising is, in and of itself, inherently misleading
commercial speech that the government can “freely regulate” under Central
Hudson.  We find that Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350, 372 (1977),
holding in the context of newspaper advertising that “[w]e are not persuaded that
restrained professional advertising by lawyers inevitably will be misleading,”
indicates to the contrary.  We further note that in its 1999 term the United States
Supreme Court reaffirmed its strong adherence to Central Hudson in Greater New
Orleans Broadcasting Association, Inc. v. United States, 119 S. Ct. 1923 (1999).
“[S]tate rules [on attorney advertising and solicitation] may be no broader
than reasonably necessary to prevent the perceived evil.”  Florida Bar v. Herrick,
571 So. 2d 1303, 1305 (Fla. 1990) (citing In re R.M.J., 455 U.S. 191 (1982)), cert.
denied, 501 U.S. 1205 (1991).  Prophylactic prohibitions are by definition broad in
nature and have been generally disfavored in the context of attorney advertising 
-12-
and solicitation.  Specifically, the United States Supreme Court has held that states
may not prophylactically prohibit attorneys from:  (1) advertising the costs of
certain routine legal services in the print media, see Bates, 433 U.S. at 383
(“[A]dvertising by attorneys may not be subjected to blanket suppression.”); (2)
advertising an accurate listing of attorney’s areas of practice, either through
general mailings, announcements to specific targeted groups, newspaper
advertisements, or telephone listings, see R.M.J., 455 U.S. at 203 (“[T]he States
may not place an absolute prohibition on certain types of potentially misleading
information . . . if the information also may be presented in a way that is not
deceptive.”); (3) advising through the print media target portions of the public of
their rights to pursue particular types of cases, as well as the attorney’s willingness
to handle such litigation, see Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel, 471 U.S.
626, 649 (1985) (“[B]road prophylactic rules may not be so lightly justified if the
protections afforded commercial speech are to retain their force.”); (4) directly
soliciting through the mail clients with a particular legal problem, see Shapero v.
Kentucky Bar Ass'n, 486 U.S. 466, 476 (1988) (“[M]erely because targeted,
direct-mail solicitation presents lawyers with opportunities for isolated abuses or
mistakes does not justify a total ban on that mode of protected commercial
speech.”); (5) directly soliciting prospective clients where the attorney is
-13-
motivated by the desire to promote political and ideological goals rather than for
purely pecuniary gain, see In re Primus, 436 U.S. 412, 432-33 (1978) (“Because
of the danger of censorship through selective enforcement of broad prohibitions,
and ‘[b]ecause First Amendment freedoms need breathing space to survive,
government may regulate in [this] area only with narrow specificity.’”) (quoting
NAACP v. Button, 371 U.S. 415, 433 (1963)); and (6) indicating on letterhead
certification as a trial specialist by a recognized national organization, see Peel v.
Attorney Registration & Disciplinary Comm’n of Illinois, 496 U.S. 91, 110 (1990)
(“A State may not . . . completely ban statements that are not actually or inherently
misleading, such as certification as a specialist by bona fide organizations . . . .”)
(plurality opinion); see also Ibanez v. Florida Dep’t of Bus. and Prof’l Reg., 512
U.S. 136 (1994).  See generally Florida Bar Petition to Amend Rules Regulating
Florida Bar–Advertising Issues, 571 So. 2d 451, 458-59 (Fla. 1990) (quoting with
approval from Robert D. Peltz, Legal Advertising–Opening Pandora’s Box?, 19
Stetson L. Rev. 43, 44 (1989)).
The United States Supreme Court has upheld such a prophylactic
prohibition, but only in the context of in-person attorney solicitation motivated by
pecuniary gain due to the unique problems associated therewith:
Unlike a public advertisement, which simply provides information
-14-
and leaves the recipient free to act upon it or not, in-person
solicitation may exert pressure and often demands an immediate
response, without providing an opportunity for comparison or
reflection.  The aim and effect of in-person solicitation may be to
provide a one-sided presentation and to encourage speedy and
perhaps uninformed decisionmaking; there is no opportunity for the
intervention or counter-education by agencies of the Bar, supervisory
authorities, or persons close to the solicited individual.  The
admonition that “the fitting remedy for evil counsels is good ones” is
of little value when the circumstances provide no opportunity for any
remedy at all.  In-person solicitation is as likely as not to discourage
persons needing counsel from engaging in a critical comparison of the
“availability, nature, and prices” of legal services; it actually may
disserve the individual and societal interest, identified in Bates, in
facilitating “informed and reliable decisionmaking.”
. . . . 
. . . Unlike the advertising in Bates, in-person solicitation is not
visible or otherwise open to public scrutiny.  Often there is no
witness other than the lawyer and the lay person whom he has
solicited, rendering it difficult or impossible to obtain reliable proof
of what actually took place.  This would be especially true if the lay
person were so distressed at the time of the solicitation that he could
not recall specific details at a later date.  [As such], in-person
solicitation would be virtually immune to effective oversight and
regulation by the State or by the legal profession, in contravention of
the State’s strong interest in regulating members of the Bar in an
effective, objective, and self-enforcing manner.  It therefore is not
unreasonable, or violative of the Constitution, for a State to respond
with what in effect is a prophylactic rule.
Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Ass’n, 436 U.S. 447, 457-67 (1978) (citation and
footnotes omitted); see also Zauderer, 471 U.S. at 641 (characterizing in-person
solicitation at issue in Ohralik as “a practice rife with possibilities for
overreaching, invasion of privacy, the exercise of undue influence, and outright
-15-
fraud”); Florida Bar Petition, 571 So. 2d at 459 (recognizing under Ohralik that
“[s]tates may . . . permissibly . . . ban in-person solicitation when the attorney is
motivated purely for pecuniary gain.”).  However, none of the unique concerns at
issue in Ohralik in the context of in-person solicitation apply in the context of
general television and radio advertising directly at issue in the present case.
Nevertheless, “[i]n holding that advertising by attorneys may not be
subjected to blanket suppression, . . . we, of course, do not hold that advertising by
attorneys may not be regulated in any way.”  Bates, 433 U.S. at 383.  “As with
other varieties of speech, it follows as well that there may be reasonable restrictions
on the time, place, and manner of [attorney] advertising.”  Id at 384; accord Florida
Bar Petition, 571 So. 2d at 458.  As specifically recognized by the United States
Supreme Court in Bates, “the special problems of advertising on the electronic
broadcast media will warrant special consideration.”  433 U.S. at 384.  This Court
has similarly recognized that electronic broadcast media may "require more
restrictions than other[]" types of media.  Florida Bar Petition, 571 So. 2d at 458. 
With these general precepts in mind, we now address some of the restrictions on
television and radio advertising advanced by the Bar in proposed rule 4-7.5(b).
The Bar's proposed rule 4-7.5(b) does not completely ban such advertising
but rather prohibits advertising on television and radio any information other than
6Proposed rule 4-7.2(c)(10) (Permissible Content of Advertisements) does not differ
significantly from its predecessor (existing rule 4-7.2(n)) and sets forth a list of somewhat generic
information in advertisements and written communications that shall be presumed not to violate
the rules regarding false, misleading, deceptive, or unfair communication about a lawyer or the
lawyer’s services.  The information listed includes: the name of the lawyer or law firm, office
locations and parking arrangements, disability accommodations, telephone numbers, Web site and
electronic mail addresses, office and telephone service hours, a designation such as “attorney” or
“law firm,” date of admission to The Florida Bar and any other bars, years of experience
practicing law, number of lawyers in the advertising firm, a listing of federal courts and
jurisdictions other than Florida where the lawyer is licensed to practice, technical and professional
licenses granted by the state or other recognized licensing authorities, and educational degrees
received (including dates and institutions); foreign language ability, fields of law in which the
lawyer practices, including certification logos, prepaid or group legal service plans in which the
lawyer participates, acceptance of credit cards, fee for initial consultation and fee schedule, a
listing of the name and geographic location of a lawyer or law firm as a sponsor of a public
service announcement or charitable, civic, or community program or event, and common salutary
language, such as “best wishes,” “good luck,” “happy holidays,” or “pleased to announce.”  The
proposed rule additionally provides that a lawyer referral service may advertise its name, location,
telephone number, the referral fee charged, its hours of operation, the process by which referrals
are made, the areas of law in which referrals are offered, the geographic area in which the lawyers
practice and to whom those responding to the advertisement will be referred, and, if applicable, its
nonprofit status, its status as a lawyer referral service approved by The Florida Bar, and the logo
of its sponsoring bar association.
-16-
the somewhat generic information listed in proposed rule 4-7.2(c)(10).6  However,
as stressed at length above, our primary concern and the evident concern of the
United States Supreme Court is the “free flow of commercial information,”
Zauderer, 471 U.S. at 646, and, more specifically, the “disclosure of truthful,
relevant information.”  Peel, 496 U.S. at 108.  Indeed, in its comment on proposed
rule 4-7.5, the Bar itself references its goal of “not interfering with the free flow of
useful information to prospective users of legal services.”  So severely restricting
the information allowed in attorney advertising on television and radio as would 
-17-
be required by proposed rule 4-7.5(b), especially without reference to the
touchstones of truth and relevance, we find does not further this goal.
We note that in referencing a strikingly similar “laundry list” of generic
information in the print-media context, the United States Supreme Court
recognized that “an advertising diet limited to such spartan fare would provide
scant nourishment.”  Bates, 433 U.S. at 367.  We therefore reject rule 4-7.5(b) as
proposed by the Bar and substitute in pertinent part:  "Advertisements on
electronic media such as television and radio may contain, but are not necessarily
limited to containing, some or all of the information listed in rule 4-7.2(c)(10)."  In
so doing, however, we stress that attorneys will of course nevertheless still be
prohibited from making false, misleading, or deceptive representations under
proposed rule 4-7.2(b) (Prohibited Statements and Information).
Proposed rule 4-7.5(b) also restricts the visual images appearing in
television advertisements to “the advertising lawyer in front of a background
consisting of a single solid color, a set of law books in an unadorned bookcase, or
the lawyer’s own office (with no other office personnel shown).”  We approve this
restriction as it does not significantly impede the flow of truthful and relevant
information which, as we have stressed repeatedly in this opinion, serves as our
polestar in the attorney advertising context.  As we have previously recognized,
7Proposed rule 4-7.11 (Lawyer Referral Services) does not differ significantly from its
predecessor (existing rule 4-7.8), insofar as both authorize lawyer referral services and in
pertinent part identically define a “lawyer referral service” as:
(1) any person, group of persons, association, organization, or entity that
receives a fee or charge for referring or causing the direct or indirect referral of a
potential client to a lawyer drawn from a specific group or panel of lawyers; or
(2) any group or pooled advertising program operated by any person,
group of persons, association, organization, or entity wherein the legal services
advertisements utilize a common telephone number and potential clients are then
referred only to lawyers or law firms participating in the group or pooled
advertising program.
-18-
“the electronic broadcast media, if manipulated, can produce unrealistic images
and expectations.”  Florida Bar Petition, 571 So. 2d at 458.  We agree with the
portion of the Bar’s comment to proposed rule 4-7.5 that
the unique characteristics of electronic media, including the
pervasiveness of television and radio, the ease with which these
media are abused, and the passiveness of the viewer or listener, make
the electronic media especially subject to regulation in the public
interest.  Therefore, greater restrictions on the manner of television
and radio advertising are justified than might be appropriate for
advertisements in the other media.
Proposed rule 4-7.5(b) also prohibits the voice or image of anyone but a
lawyer of the firm whose services are being advertised, even in the context of
lawyer referral service advertisements specifically authorized in proposed rule 4-
7.11.7  As commented by the representative of one lawyer referral service that
utilizes a spokesperson who is not a lawyer:
Perhaps there’s a concern that the public will be misled into thinking
that a non-lawyer’s “voice” or actor’s “image” in a radio/T.V. ad will
-19-
be that of the very lawyer that they will be engaging or at least one of
the lawyers in the advertising firm.  If that’s the concern, a simple
disclosure would surely clarify the situation.  Surely, if we permit any
one “member” of a multi-person firm to be spokesperson, we leave
ourselves open to the same claim: “Hey, you’re not the guy on T.V.! 
I was misled.”
 . . . . 
 . . . As applied to the program we coordinate, [the proposed
rule would mean] multiple ads for multiple areas, a proliferation of
expense for participants and frequent editing.  What if the participant
in the ad moves, retires, dies, becomes judge or just drops out of the
program?  We would continually have to create yet another ad and
this would become prohibitive.  If this interpretation is accurate, the
problem will seriously affect or kill off all similar lawyer referral
service advertising.
(Emphasis omitted.)  We find these comments to be persuasive and note that it
would be inconsistent to allow lawyer referral service advertisements on the one
hand under proposed rule 4-7.11 but to disallow the use of spokespersons on the
other hand under proposed rule 4-7.5(b).  Therefore, we decline to adopt proposed
rule 4-7.5(b) in this regard and modify same as reflected in the appendix to this
opinion to allow a spokesperson with an appropriate spoken disclosure to speak or
appear in a lawyer referral service television or radio advertisement on behalf of
the participating attorneys.  See Bates, 433 U.S. at 384 (“We do not foreclose the
possibility that some limited supplementation, by way of warning or disclaimer or
the like, might be required of [attorney advertising] . . . so as to assure that the
consumer is not misled.”).
-20-
Proposed Rule 4-7.10(b)
Proposed rule 4-7.10(b) (Trade Names) prophylactically prohibits the use of
trade names by lawyers and law firms.  The Bar urges such a prophylactic
prohibition because it claims “the use of trade names has proven to be actually and
potentially misleading to the public.”
The United States Supreme Court has recognized that “[t]he use of trade
names . . . is a form of commercial speech.”  Friedman v. Rogers, 440 U.S. 1, 11
(1979).  As already discussed at length above, prophylactic prohibitions on
commercial speech by attorneys have been generally disfavored.  However, the
United States Supreme Court in Friedman upheld a prophylactic prohibition on the
use of trade names by optometrists due to specific concerns that were “not
speculative or hypothetical” but were “well demonstrated” and “based on
experience” establishing that “[t]he possibilities for deception [were] numerous.” 
440 U.S. at 13-15.  For example, The United States Supreme Court in Friedman
elaborated that
[t]he trade name of an optometrical practice can remain unchanged
despite changes in the staff of optometrists upon whose skill and care
the public depends when it patronizes the practice.  Thus, the public
may be attracted by a trade name that reflects the reputation of an
optometrist no longer associated with the practice.
Id. at 13.  Significantly, however, this “possibilit[y] for deception” is not entirely
-21-
alleviated by the prophylactic prohibition urged in the present case, due to an
explicit exception thereto.  Specifically, proposed rule 4-7.10(b)(4) exempts from
this prophylactic prohibition “a law firm practicing as a partnership or authorized
business entity that uses as its name or includes in its name the name or names of 1
or more deceased or retired members of the firm or of a predecessor firm in a
continuing line of succession.”  As stated in one comment opposing the
prophylactic prohibition on the use of trade names by attorneys:
Nonmisleading or nonfraudulent trade names should be allowed. 
Keeping former prominent retired or deceased attorneys names in a
law firm’s moniker has been traditional and allowed but [is] spurious
and misleading.  It is a fiction and a trade name.  The modern appetite
for legal specialization, which leads consumers to such specialties,
should be encouraged, not discouraged, in order to be consumer
friendly.
In further elaborating upon “[t]he [numerous] possibilities for deception,”
the United States Supreme Court in Friedman continued: 
A trade name frees an optometrist from dependence on his personal
reputation to attract clients, and even allows him to assume a new
trade name if negligence or misconduct casts a shadow over the old
one.  By using different trade names at shops under his common
ownership, an optometrist can give the public the false impression of
competition among the shops.  The use of a trade name also
facilitates the advertising essential to large-scale commercial
practices with numerous branch offices, conduct the State rationally
may wish to discourage while not prohibiting commercial
optometrical practice altogether.
-22-
440 U.S. at 13.  Significantly, however, none of these weighty “possibilities for
deception” are advanced as a justification for the prophylactic prohibition on the
use of attorney trade names urged in the present case.  As discussed at length
below, the concerns and examples cited in the present case are relatively slight in
comparison to those at issue in Friedman.
As justification for the prophylactic prohibition urged in the present case,
the Bar asserts that “in Florida the use of [trade] names in law practice has proven
to be misleading to the public in various ways.”  In support of this assertion, the
Bar relies in significant part on the Task Force’s finding that “elements of
commonly used trade names, such as ‘clinic,’ ‘legal services,’ and ‘group,’
confuse and mislead the public about the nature of the advertising entity, its level
of resources, and the extent of its experience and expertise in the advertised areas
of law.”  In making this finding, the Task Force in turn primarily relied upon the
studies prepared on behalf of the Bar by Frank N. Magid Associates (the Magid
studies).
We have examined the Magid studies and are not convinced that a
prophylactic prohibition on attorney trade names is warranted.  While focus group
participants indicated that attorney trade names using the term “group” or “center”
gave the impression of involving more than one person, “most recognize[d] that
-23-
the individuals or organizations advertising ‘could be just one person.’”  Frank N.
Magid Associates, Attitudes and Impressions of Attorney Advertising:  A
Summary of Focus Group Results 8 (1997).
Furthermore, to the extent that the Bar impliedly suggests that the use of
attorney trade names tarnishes the profession or unreasonably influences potential
clients, the Magid studies reveal:
Solid majorities (around 75% to 80%) do not believe any of the
[sample attorney trade name] ads influence their respect for the legal
system one way or another . . . .  Clear majorities (around 50% to
60%) say they probably or certainly would not retain the entity on the
basis of the ad.
Frank N. Magid Associates, Attitudes and Impressions of Attorney Advertising: 
An Executive Summary of Phase II Results 9 (1997).
Finally and, to our view, most compellingly, the Magid studies reveal that
focus group participants perceived that “the specific areas of law mentioned [in the
sample attorney trade names] refer to an organization’s area of concentration.” 
Frank N. Magid Associates, Attitudes and Impressions of Attorney Advertising:  A
Summary of Focus Group Results 10 (1997).  For example, the focus group
participants typically perceived “The Ticket Center” as “specializ[ing] in DUIs
and tickets,” “[t]hat’s all they do.”  Id. at 8.  As stated in one comment filed with
this Court:
-24-
Contrary to the Bar’s assertions, rather than being misleading,
this is in fact informative.  Clearly a firm named “The Ticket Center”
would in fact concentrate on tickets and DUI’s as indicated in their
print ads.  Would a prospective client think to call “The Ticket
Center” for a divorce or a will?  Obviously not.  Clearly the name
rather than being misleading as the Bar suggests is informative and
indicative of the type of service that the prospective client will
receive.
As succinctly stated in a similar comment, “the proposed prohibition would . . .
severely limit the public’s ability to quickly learn information which could narrow
the search for a suitable law firm.”  As more exhaustively phrased in another
comment:
Prohibiting the use of trade names impairs the public’s
understanding of the legal services provided by attorneys.  The use of
a simple trade name in my practice aids the public in accessing my
legal services by helping potential clients understand the area of law I
specialize in. . . . 
 . . . The widespread advertising by numerous attorneys
necessitates a simplified way for those seeking to access legal
services to identify attorneys who can help them with their specific
problems.  A trade name is easy to remember and to refer on to
others as opposed to a string of names that is difficult for anyone to
recall . . . .
 . . . . 
 . . . [P]rohibiting the use of a simple trade name in advertising
seems to be an unnecessary restriction on advertising content.  While
false, misleading, or deceptive trade names should clearly be
prohibited, a trade name that assists clients in identifying and
recalling the attorney who helps them should continue to be permitted
in advertisements for legal services.
We also received comments to the effect that “[countless law firms] have relied for
-25-
15 years on this court’s approval of the use of trade names conditioned only upon
the absence of deception.  It is manifestly unfair to all who have so relied to shut
them down precipitously.”
We agree with these and other similar comments filed in opposition to the
urged prophylactic prohibition on the use of attorney trade names and reject same
as reflected in the appendix to this opinion.  Again, as in the television and radio
advertising context discussed above, we do so with an eye toward the guiding
commercial speech principle that “disclosure of truthful, relevant information is
more likely to make a positive contribution to decisionmaking than is concealment
of such information.”  Peel, 496 U.S. at 108 (plurality opinion).  To the extent that
attorney trade names can be informative, “the right involved is that of the consumer
to have all information necessary to make an intelligent economic decision.” 
Florida Bar Petition, 571 So. 2d at 457 (emphasis removed).
Our decision to reject the urged prophylactic prohibition on attorney trade
names is buttressed by the apparent efficacy of the existing restrictions thereon.  As
phrased in one comment filed in this Court, “The Florida Bar already has at its
disposal sufficient tools to deal with misleading trade names.  The use of
misleading trade names is already prohibited.”
More specifically, the existing rules already prohibit false, misleading, or
-26-
deceptive firm names.  See existing rule 4-7.7(a) (False, Misleading, or Deceptive);
accord proposed rule 4-7.10(a).  For example, under existing rule 4-7.7(a), the
Standing Committee on Advertising (SCA) recently found several trade names to
be misleading, including “Florida Lawyers Professional Association,” “Florida
Employment Law Center,” “Legal Center for the Injured,” and “First American
Law.”  See Advertising Update, Florida Bar News, May 1, 1998, at 26; cf. Florida
Bar v. Fetterman, 439 So. 2d 835, 840 (Fla. 1983) (finding the trade name “The
Law Team, Fetterman and Associates” to be “neither inherently nor operatively
misleading,” and accordingly rejecting the referee’s recommendation that the
subject attorney be found guilty of violating the Code of Professional
Responsibility and enjoined from using the trade name).  We explicitly do not
comment upon whether we agree with the SCA that the listed trade names are
misleading but reference same to underscore the fact that existing rule 4-7.7(a) can
be and is already actively applied to regulate attorney trade names in Florida.
Existing rule 4-7.7(b) (Trade Names) similarly allows attorneys to use a
trade name so long as it “is not deceptive and does not imply a connection with a
government agency or with a public or charitable legal services organization, does
not imply that the firm is something other than a private law firm, and is not
otherwise [false, misleading, or deceptive].”  As even more pertinent to the present
-27-
case, existing rule 4-7.7(b) further provides that “[a] lawyer in private practice may
use the term “legal clinic” or “legal services” in conjunction with the lawyer’s own
name if the lawyer’s practice is devoted to providing routine legal services for fees
that are lower than the prevailing rate in the community for those services.”  See
also comment to existing rule 4-7.7 (elaborating that terms such as “academy” and
“institute” are precluded because they imply that the firm is something other than a
private law firm); Bates, 433 U.S. at 381 (“We suspect that the public would
readily understand the term ‘legal clinic’–if, indeed, it focused on the term at all–to
refer to an operation . . . that is geared to provide standardized and multiple
services.”).  Insofar as the Bar in the present case has expressed special concern
over the use of terms “clinic,” “legal services,” and “group” in attorney trade
names, it may wish to consider further conditions or restrictions on these and other
similar terms instead of the urged prophylactic prohibition on all attorney trade
names.  See id. at 383 (“In holding that advertising by attorneys may not be
subjected to blanket suppression, . . . we, of course, do not hold that advertising by
attorneys may not be regulated in any way.”)
Conclusion
As we did in Florida Bar Petition, we again find that these rules, as we have
modified them, are narrowly tailored to further a substantial governmental interest
-28-
since they propose to ensure the truthful dissemination of information by regulating,
not prohibiting, legal advertising.  571 So. 2d at 460.  We commend the Bar, the
Task Force, and all those who filed comments for their collective insight and
inspiring dedication to the legal profession and the public’s perception thereof.
We approve as modified the proposed rules as discussed at length in this
opinion and as reflected in the attached appendix.  New language is indicated by
underscoring; deletions by strike-through type.  The committee notes are offered
for explanation only and are not adopted as an official part of the rules. The
amendments shall become effective upon the release of this opinion.
It is so ordered.
HARDING, C.J., SHAW and ANSTEAD, JJ., and OVERTON and KOGAN, 
Senior Justices, concur.
OVERTON, Senior Justice, concurs with an opinion, in which ANSTEAD, J.,
concurs.
WELLS, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with an opinion.
PARIENTE, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with an opinion.
OVERTON, Senior Justice, concurring.
I concur.  I write to emphasize that our decision in this case is controlled by
seven decisions of the United States Supreme Court on lawyer advertising.  See
Bates v. State Bar, 433 U.S. 350 (1977); Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Ass'n, 436 U.S.
-29-
447 (1978); In re Primus, 436 U.S. 412 (1978); In re R.M.J., 455 U.S. 191 (1982);
Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel, 471 U.S. 626 (1985); Shapero v.
Kentucky Bar Ass'n, 486 U.S. 466 (1988); and Florida Bar v. Went For It, Inc., 515
U.S. 618 (1995).  In our decision, Florida Bar Petition to Amend Rules Regulating
Florida Bar--Advertising Issues, 571 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 1990), we discussed the legal
principles of commercial free speech and lawyer advertising in accordance with the
United States Supreme Court decisions.  At the time, our advertising rules adopted
in that case were considered to be among the most restrictive in the country.  The
rules we adopted in that case, and in particular the rule prohibiting attorneys from
targeting direct mail advertising to victims of personal injury less than thirty days
after the incident, were challenged before the United States Supreme Court.  In its
decision in Florida Bar v. Went For It, Inc., 515 U.S. 618 (1995), our rules were
approved because they followed the underlying principle that they did not adversely
affect the disclosure of truthful, relevant information and because the thirty-day ban
targeting direct-mail solicitation of accident victims concerned sensitive privacy
issues resulting from a "lawyer's confrontation of victims or relatives with . . .
information, while wounds are still open, in order to solicit their business."  515
U.S. at 630.  The Supreme Court emphasized that this restriction involved only "a
brief period" amounting to a "short temporal ban" that was 
-30-
"narrow both in scope and in duration."  Id. at 633-35.
 I find the rules we adopt today are as far as we can go under the established
commercial free speech principles enunciated by the United States Supreme Court. 
To go further as suggested by the dissent would, in my view, threaten the validity of
the entire regulatory scheme.
At this point in time, it is not whether I would like to severely restrict or
abolish lawyer advertising to enhance professionalism, it is what advertising
restrictions are constitutionally permissible under the provisions and guidelines set
out by the United States Supreme Court.
ANSTEAD, J., concurs.
WELLS, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur with that portion of the majority opinion which adopts the Bar's
proposed amendments to the rules with the exception of the following two issues.
First, I dissent from the majority's rejection (slip op. at 19) of the Bar's
proposed prohibition in rule 7.5(b) of the voice or image as it pertains to lawyer
referral services.  I would make an exception for lawyer referral services authorized
under rule 7-4.11 but only so as to allow an employee of the service to be used in
lieu of a lawyer.  I would not allow a spokesperson.  What is being addressed by
-31-
the Bar’s proposal is the use of celebrity advertisements, which do not further the
legitimate purposes of lawyer advertising.
Second, I would adopt the Bar's proposal on trade names.  However, I would
provide a thirty-six-month compliance period rather than eighteen months because
of the concerns raised about lawyers who have expended money developing a trade
name.  I would use this period of time to work out in more detail what trade names
would be permitted.  I have to conclude that the use of what can only be termed
unprofessional trade names is inherently misleading and, more importantly, brings
disrespect to the judicial system.  There should simply be no place for the use of
names designed to give the impression that the lawyer can "fix" a traffic ticket, as
do some names presently, or which are used merely to obtain the first listing in the
telephone yellow pages.  I do not find offensive to the enforcement of this rule the
exception in the Bar's proposed rule for law firm names which have historical roots
in real past partners.
I reiterate my strongly held view that we must not have advertising
regulations which are not enforced or are selectively enforced.  Commercial free
speech is a valuable right, but it should be limited so that the courts receive the
public respect which the functioning of the court system requires, and such
limitation must fairly and effectively limit all Florida lawyers–not just those who
-32-
voluntarily comply.
PARIENTE, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur with the majority opinion except for the following:
I agree with Justice Wells' concurring in part and dissenting in part opinion
as to his comments on trade names.  As discussed by Justice Wells, I would adopt
the Bar’s proposal on trade names, but I would also extend the compliance period
to thirty-six months, rather than eighteen months.  
My greater concern with the majority's opinion, however, has to do with its
modifications of the Bar's proposed amendments regarding television and radio
advertising in rule 4-7.5(b), entitled "Advertisements in the Electronic Media,
Other Than Computer-Accessed Communications."  The majority's modification is
a significant one in that it changes the Bar's proposed amendment that states: 
Advertisements on the electronic media such as television and radio
shall contain no information other than some or all of that listed in rule
4-7.2(c)(10). 
Rather, the majority substitutes this proposal with the following:
Advertisements on the electronic media such as television and radio
may contain, but are not necessarily limited to containing, some or all
of the information listed in rule 4-7.2(c)(10).
-33-
By changing "shall" to “may . . . but . . . not necessarily limited to,” the majority
has changed a critical element of the Bar’s proposed amendment.  Instead of
incorporating the specific list of guidelines that precisely limit what may be
included in television or radio advertisements, the majority's modification to rule 4-
7.2(b) contains no limitation on what may be included in an advertisement other
than that the advertisement may not be “unsubstantiated,” “unfair or deceptive,”
“false or misleading,” or “potentially false or misleading.”  This standard is no
different than the limitation already in existence.  See R. Regulating Fla. Bar 4-
7.3(f)(1)-(5) (superseded by the amendments in this opinion).
In my opinion, the information provided in the Bar's proposed amendment is
sufficiently inclusive to satisfy the public's need for information and is sufficiently
definite to be enforceable.  In contrast, the Court's substitution that prohibits false,
misleading, or deceptive advertising is in reality so general as to run the risk of
either selective enforcement or no enforcement whatsoever.  Further, because no
pre-screening requirement is included or practical, once the electronic
advertisement has been aired the damage to the public will have been done. 
The Bar's proposed amendment itself was a compromise from the original
Task Force recommendation.  After a year and a half of careful study, the Task
Force concluded that a complete prohibition on advertisements for legal services in
8 The Task Force also conducted a survey of Florida judges that revealed that 88% of the
judges believe that lawyer advertising has adversely affected the public's confidence in the
administration of justice, and virtually all of those judges (95%) believe that the effect of lawyer
advertising was a negative one. 
-34-
the electronic media was the only practical way to address the problems created by
television advertising and that such a prohibition would withstand constitutional
scrutiny.  The Task Force commissioned a national research firm to determine to
what extent lawyer advertising was adversely affecting the administration of
justice.  The resulting research showed that:
[L]awyer advertising simply does not provide the public with the
useful, factual information that it wants and needs in order to make an
informed choice about the hiring of a lawyer.  Significantly, the data
further shows that much lawyer advertising – especially television
advertising – lowers the public’s respect for the fairness and integrity
of the legal system.8 
This Court has acknowledged before and acknowledges again here that
electronically broadcast advertising requires more restrictions than other forms of
advertising.  See Florida Bar Petition to Amend Rules Regulating Florida Bar, 571
So.2d 451, 458 (Fla. 1990).  In fact, our comment to our amended rule 4-7.5
recognizes that
the unique characteristics of electronic media, including the
pervasiveness of television and radio, the ease with which these media
are abused, and the passiveness of the viewer or listener, make the
electronic media especially subject to regulation in the public interest. 
Therefore, greater restrictions on the manner of television and radio
-35-
advertising are justified than might be appropriate for advertisements
in the other media.
Indeed, as the United States Supreme Court recognized, "the special problems of
advertising on the electronic broadcast media will warrant special consideration." 
Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350, 384 (1977).
This Court cannot oversee how the electronic media portrays the judicial
system and the legal profession, nor can we control the content of television
programs such as Judge Judy and Ally McBeal.  We do have the authority,
however, to regulate lawyer advertising.  If we are not prepared to ban television
advertising completely, as the Task Force recommended, I find no valid reason for
this Court's rejection of the carefully crafted amendment proposed by the Bar.  In
my opinion, the Bar's proposed amendment provides the proper structure for the
rule—to limit electronic advertising to information that assists the consumer in
making informed choices as to representation while ensuring that the advertising
does not further contribute to the erosion of public trust and confidence in our
judicial system. 
-36-
APPENDIX
4-7.  INFORMATION ABOUT LEGAL SERVICES
RULE 4-7.1  COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING A LAWYER'S
SERVICES GENERAL
A lawyer shall not make or permit to be made a false, misleading, deceptive,
or unfair communication about the lawyer or the lawyer's services.  A
communication violates this rule if it:
(a)  contains a material misrepresentation of fact or law or omits a fact
necessary to make the statement considered as a whole not materially misleading; 
Permissible Forms of Advertising.  Subject to all the requirements set forth in
this subchapter 4-7, including the filing requirements of rule 4-7.7, a lawyer may
advertise services through public media, including but not limited to:  print media,
such as a telephone directory, legal directory, newspaper or other periodical;
outdoor advertising, such as billboards and other signs; radio, television, and 
computer-accessed communications; recorded messages the public may access by
dialing a telephone number; and written communication in accordance with rule 4-
7.4.
(b)  is likely to create an unjustified expectation about results the lawyer can
achieve or states or implies that the lawyer can achieve results by means that
violate the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law; Advertisements Not
Disseminated in Florida.  These rules shall not apply to any advertisement
broadcast or disseminated in another jurisdiction in which the advertising lawyer is
admitted if such advertisement complies with the rules governing lawyer
advertising in that jurisdiction and is not intended for broadcast or dissemination
within the state of Florida.
(c)  compares the lawyer's services with other lawyers' services, unless the
comparison can be factually substantiated; or
(d)  contains a testimonial.
-37-
Comment
This rule governs all communications about a lawyer's services, including
advertising permitted by rule 4-7.2.  Whatever means are used to make known a
lawyer's services, statements about them must be truthful.  This precludes any
material misrepresentation or misleading omission, such as where a lawyer states or
implies certification or recognition as a specialist other than in accordance with rule
4-7.5, where a lawyer implies that any court, tribunal, or other public body or
official can be improperly influenced, or where a lawyer advertises a particular fee
or a contingency fee without disclosing whether the client will also be liable for
costs.  Another example of a misleading omission is an advertisement for a law firm
that states that all the firm's lawyers are juris doctors but does not disclose that a
juris doctorate is a law degree rather than a medical degree of some sort and that
virtually any law firm in the United States can make the same claim.  Although rule
4-7.2 permits lawyers to list the jurisdictions and courts to which they are admitted,
it also would be misleading for a lawyer who does not list other jurisdictions or
courts to state that the lawyer is a member of The Florida Bar.  Standing by itself,
that otherwise truthful statement implies falsely that the lawyer possesses a
qualification not common to virtually all lawyers practicing in Florida.  The latter 2
examples of misleading omissions also are examples of unfair advertising.
The prohibition in subdivision (b) of statements that may create "unjustified
expectations" precludes advertisements about results obtained on behalf of a client,
such as the amount of a damage award or the lawyer's record in obtaining favorable
verdicts, and advertisements containing client endorsements or testimonials.  Such
information may create the unjustified expectation that similar results can be
obtained for others without reference to the specific factual and legal
circumstances.
The prohibition in subdivision (c) of comparisons that cannot be factually
substantiated would preclude a lawyer from representing that the lawyer or the
lawyer's law firm is "the best," "one of the best," or "one of the most experienced"
in a field of law.
The prohibition in subdivision (d) would preclude endorsements or
testimonials because they are inherently misleading to a person untrained in the
law.  Potential clients are likely to infer from the testimonial that the lawyer will
-38-
reach similar results in future cases.  Because the lawyer cannot directly make this
assertion, the lawyer is not permitted to indirectly make that assertion through the
use of testimonials.
To assist the public in obtaining legal services, lawyers should be allowed to
make known their services not only through reputation but also through organized
information campaigns in the form of advertising.  The public's need to know about
legal services can be fulfilled in part through advertising that provides the public
with useful, factual information about legal rights and needs and the availability and
terms of legal services from a particular lawyer or law firm.  This need is
particularly acute in the case of persons of moderate means who have not made
extensive use of legal services.  Nevertheless, certain types of advertising by
lawyers create the risk of practices that are misleading or overreaching and can
create unwarranted expectations by persons untrained in the law.  Such advertising
can also adversely affect the public's confidence and trust in our judicial system.
In order to balance the public's need for useful information, the state's need
to ensure a system by which justice will be administered fairly and properly, as
well as the state's need to regulate and monitor the advertising practices of lawyers,
and a lawyer's right to advertise the availability of the lawyer's services to the
public, these rules permit public dissemination of information concerning a lawyer's
name or firm name, address, and telephone number; the kinds of services the
lawyer will undertake; the basis on which the lawyer's fees are determined,
including prices for specific services and payment and credit arrangements; a
lawyer's foreign language ability; names of references and, with their consent,
names of clients regularly represented; and other factual information that might
invite the attention of those seeking legal assistance.
Regardless of medium, a lawyer's advertisement should provide only useful,
factual information presented in a nonsensational manner.  Advertisements utilizing
slogans or jingles,  oversized electrical and neon signs, or sound trucks fail to meet
these standards and diminish public confidence in the legal system.
These rules do not prohibit communications authorized by law, such as
notice to members of a class in class action litigation.
-39-
These rules apply to advertisements and written communications directed at
prospective clients and concerning a lawyer's or law firm's availability to provide
legal services.  These rules do not apply to communications between lawyers,
including brochures used for recruitment purposes.
-40-
4-7.2   ADVERTISING COMMUNICATIONS CONCERNING A
LAWYER'S SERVICES
The following shall apply to any communication conveying information
about a lawyer's or a law firm's services:
(a) Permissible Forms of Advertising.  Subject to all the requirements set
forth in this subchapter 4-7, including the filing requirements of rule 4-7.5, a lawyer
may advertise services through public media, such as a telephone directory, legal
directory, newspaper or other periodical, billboards and other signs, radio,
television, and recorded messages the public may access by dialing a telephone
number, or through written communication not involving solicitation as defined in
rule 4-7.4.  These rules shall not apply to any advertisement broadcast or
disseminated in another jurisdiction in which the advertising lawyer is admitted if
such advertisement complies with the rules governing lawyer advertising in that
jurisdiction and is not intended for broadcast or dissemination within the State of
Florida.  Required Information.
(1)  Name of Lawyer or Lawyer Referral Service.  All advertisements and
written communications pursuant to these rules shall include the name of at least 1
lawyer or the lawyer referral service responsible for their content.
(2)  Location of Practice.  All advertisements and written communications
provided for under these rules shall disclose, by city or town, 1 or more bona fide
office locations of the lawyer or lawyers who will actually perform the services
advertised.  If the office location is outside a city or town, the county in which the
office is located must be disclosed.  A lawyer referral service shall disclose the
geographic area in which the lawyer practices when a referral is made.  For the
purposes of this rule, a bona fide office is defined as a physical location maintained
by the lawyer or law firm where the lawyer or law firm reasonably expects to
furnish legal services in a substantial way on a regular and continuing basis.  If an
advertisement or written communication lists a telephone number in connection
with a specified geographic area other than an area containing a bona fide office,
appropriate qualifying language must appear in the advertisement.
(b) Single Voice Requirement; Employee of Lawyer or Law Firm.  
Advertisements on the electronic media such as television and radio may contain
-41-
the same factual information and illustrations as permitted in advertisements in the
print media, but the information shall be articulated by a single voice, with no
background sound other than instrumental music.  The voice may be that of a full-
time employee of the firm whose services are advertised; it shall not be that of a
celebrity whose voice is recognizable to the public.  The lawyer or full-time
employee of the firm whose services are being advertised may appear on screen or
on radio.    Prohibited Statements and Information.
(1) Statements About Legal Services.  A lawyer shall not make or permit to
be made a false, misleading, deceptive, or unfair communication about the lawyer
or the lawyer's services.  A communication violates this rule if it:
(A)  contains a material misrepresentation of fact or law or omits a fact
necessary to make the statement considered as a whole not materially misleading;
(B)  contains any reference to past successes or results obtained or is
otherwise likely to create an unjustified expectation about results the lawyer can
achieve except as allowed in the rule regulating information about a lawyer's
services provided upon request;
(C)  states or implies that the lawyer can achieve results by means that
violate the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law;
(D)  compares the lawyer's services with other lawyers' services, unless the
comparison can be factually substantiated; or
(E)  contains a testimonial.
(2)  Misleading or Deceptive Factual Statements.  Any factual statement
contained in any advertisement or written communication or any information
furnished to a prospective client under this rule shall not:
(A)  be directly or impliedly false or misleading;
(B)  be potentially false or misleading;  
-42-
(C)  fail to disclose material information necessary to prevent the information
supplied from being actually or potentially false or misleading;  
(D)  be unsubstantiated in fact; or
(E)  be unfair or deceptive. 
(3)  Descriptive Statements.  A lawyer shall not make statements describing
or characterizing the quality of the lawyer's services in advertisements and written
communications; provided that this provision shall not apply to information
furnished to a prospective client at that person's request or to information supplied
to existing clients.
(4)  Prohibited Visual and Verbal Portrayals.  Visual or verbal descriptions,
depictions, or portrayals of persons, things, or events must be objectively relevant
to the selection of an attorney and shall not be deceptive, misleading, or
manipulative.
(5) Advertising Areas of Practice.  A lawyer or law firm shall not advertise
for legal employment in an area of practice in which the advertising lawyer or law
firm does not currently practice law.
(c) Name of Lawyer or Lawyer Referral Service.  All advertisements and
written communications pursuant to these rules shall include the name of at least 1
lawyer or the lawyer referral service responsible for their content.  General
Regulations Governing Content of Advertisements.
(1)  Use of Illustrations.  All illustrations used in advertisements shall present
information that is directly related and objectively relevant to a viewer's possible
need for legal services in a specific type of matter.  Such illustrations shall be still
pictures or drawings and shall contain no features that are likely to deceive,
mislead, or confuse the viewer.
(2)  Fields of Practice.  Every advertisement and written communication that
indicates 1 or more areas of law in which the lawyer or law firm practices shall
conform to the requirements of subdivision (c)(3) of this rule.
-43-
(3)  Communication of Fields of Practice.  A lawyer may communicate the
fact that the lawyer does or does not practice in particular fields of law.  A lawyer
shall not state or imply that the lawyer is a specialist except that a lawyer who
complies with the Florida certification plan as set forth in chapter 6, Rules
Regulating The Florida Bar, or who is certified by an organization whose specialty
certification program has been accredited by the American Bar Association may
inform the public and other lawyers of the lawyer's certified areas of legal practice
and may state in communications to the public that the lawyer is a "specialist in
(area of certification)." 
(4) Disclosure of Liability For Expenses Other Than Fees.  Every
advertisement and written communication that contains information about the
lawyer's fee, including those that indicate no fee will be charged in the absence of a
recovery, shall disclose whether the client will be liable for any expenses in
addition to the fee.
(5) Period for Which Advertised Fee Must be Honored.  A lawyer who
advertises a specific fee or range of fees for a particular service shall honor the
advertised fee or range of fees for at least 90 days unless the advertisement
specifies a shorter period; provided that, for advertisements in the yellow pages of
telephone directories or other media not published more frequently than annually,
the advertised fee or range of fees shall be honored for no less than 1 year
following publication.
(6) Firm Name.  A lawyer shall not advertise services under a name that
violates the provisions of rule 4-7.10.
(7) Payment by Nonadvertising Lawyer.  No lawyer shall, directly or
indirectly, pay all or a part of the cost of an advertisement by a lawyer not in the
same firm.  Rule 4-1.5(f)(4)(D) (regarding the division of contingency fees) is not
affected by this provision even though the lawyer covered by rule 4-1.5(f)(4)(D)(ii)
advertises.
(8)  Payment for Recommendations; Lawyer Referral Service Fees.  A
lawyer shall not give anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer's
services, except that a lawyer may pay the reasonable cost of advertising or written
or recorded communication permitted by these rules, may pay the usual charges of
-44-
a lawyer referral service or other legal service organization, and may purchase a
law practice in accordance with rule 4-1.17.
(9)  Language of Required Statements.  Any words or statements required by
this subchapter to appear in an advertisement or direct mail communication must
appear in the same language in which the advertisement appears.  If more than 1
language is used in an advertisement or direct mail communication, any words or
statements required by this subchapter must appear in each language used in the
advertisement or direct mail communication.
(10) Permissible Content of Advertisements.  The following information in
advertisements and written communications shall be presumed not to violate the
provisions of subdivision (b)(1) of this rule:
(A) subject to the requirements of this rule and rule 4-7.10, the name of the
lawyer or law firm, a listing of lawyers associated with the firm, office locations
and parking arrangements, disability accommodations, telephone numbers, Web
site addresses, and electronic mail addresses, office and telephone service hours,
and a designation such as "attorney" or "law firm";
(B) date of admission to The Florida Bar and any other bars, years of
experience practicing law, number of lawyers in the advertising law firm, and a
listing of federal courts and jurisdictions other than Florida where the lawyer is
licensed to practice;
(C) technical and professional licenses granted by the state or other
recognized licensing authorities and educational degrees received, including dates
and institutions;
(D) foreign language ability;
(E) fields of law in which the lawyer practices, including official certification
logos, subject to the requirements of subdivisions (c)(2) and (c)(3) of this rule;
(F) prepaid or group legal service plans in which the lawyer participates;
-45-
(G) acceptance of credit cards;
(H) fee for initial consultation and fee schedule, subject to the requirements
of subdivisions (c)(4) and (c)(5) of this rule;
(I) a listing of the name and geographic location of a lawyer or law firm as a
sponsor of a public service announcement or charitable, civic, or community
program or event; 
(J) common salutary language such as "best wishes", "good luck", "happy
holidays", or "pleased to announce"; and 
(K) a lawyer referral service may advertise its name, location, telephone
number, the referral fee charged, its hours of operation, the process by which
referrals are made, the areas of law in which referrals are offered, the geographic
area in which the lawyers practice to whom those responding to the advertisement
will be referred, and, if applicable, its nonprofit status, its status as a lawyer referral
service approved by The Florida Bar, and the logo of its sponsoring bar
association.
(d) Disclosure Statement.  Except as provided in this subdivision, all
advertisements other than lawyer referral service advertisements shall contain the
following disclosure:  "The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should
not be based solely upon advertisements.  Before you decide, ask us to send you
free written information about our qualifications and experience."  Lawyer referral
service advertisements shall contain the following disclosure:  "The hiring of a
lawyer is an important decision.  Before you decide to hire the lawyer to whom you
are referred, ask that lawyer for written information about that lawyer's
qualifications and experience."  These disclosures need not appear in electronic
advertisements or advertisements in the public print media that contain no
illustrations and no information other than that listed in subdivision (n)(1)-(11) of
this rule.
(e) Dramatizations Prohibited.  There shall be no dramatization in any
advertisement in any medium.
-46-
(f) Use of Illustrations.  Illustrations used in advertisements shall present
information that can be factually substantiated and is not merely self-laudatory.
(g) Fields of Practice.  Every advertisement and written communication that
indicates 1 or more areas of law in which the lawyer or law firm practices shall
conform to the requirements of rule 4-7.6.
(h) Disclosure of Liability For Expenses Other Than Fees.  Every
advertisement and written communication that contains information about the
lawyer's fee, including those that indicate no fee will be charged in the absence of a
recovery, shall disclose whether the client will be liable for any expenses in
addition to the fee.  Additionally, advertisements and written communications
indicating that the charging of a fee is contingent on outcome or that the fee will be
a percentage of the recovery shall disclose (1) that the client will be liable for
expenses regardless of outcome, if the lawyer so intends to hold the client liable;
and (2) whether the percentage fee will be computed before expenses are deducted
from the recovery, if the lawyer intends to compute the percentage fee before
deducting the expenses.
(i) Period for Which Advertised Fee Must be Honored.  A lawyer who
advertises a specific fee or range of fees for a particular service shall honor the
advertised fee or range of fees for at least 90 days unless the advertisement
specifies a shorter period; provided that, for advertisements in the yellow pages of
telephone directories or other media not published more frequently than annually,
the advertised fee or range of fees shall be honored for no less than 1 year
following publication.
(j) Self-laudatory Statements.  A lawyer shall not make statements that are
merely self-laudatory or statements describing or characterizing the quality of the
lawyer's services in advertisements and written communications; provided that this
provision shall not apply to information furnished to a prospective client at that
person's request or to information supplied to existing clients.
(k) Firm Name.  A lawyer shall not advertise services under a name that
violates the provisions of rule 4-7.7.
-47-
(l) Location of Practice.  All advertisements and written communications
provided for under these rules shall disclose the geographic location, by city or
town, of the office in which the lawyer or lawyers who will actually perform the
services advertised principally practice law.  If the office location is outside a city
or town, the county in which the office is located must be disclosed.  A lawyer
referral service shall disclose the geographic area in which the lawyer practices
when a referral is made.
(m) Payment by Nonadvertising Lawyer.  No lawyer shall, directly or
indirectly, pay all or a part of the cost of an advertisement by a lawyer not in the
same firm unless the advertisement discloses the name and address of the
nonadvertising lawyer, the relationship between the advertising lawyer and the
nonadvertising lawyer, and whether the advertising lawyer may refer any case
received through the advertisement to the nonadvertising lawyer.
(n) Permissible Content of Advertisements.  The following information in
advertisements and written communications shall be presumed not to violate the
provisions of rule 4-7.1:
(1) subject to the requirements of this rule and rule 4-7.7, the name of the
lawyer or law firm, a listing of lawyers associated with the firm, office locations
and parking arrangements, disability accommodations, telephone numbers, and
electronic mail addresses, office and telephone service hours, and a designation
such as "attorney" or "law firm";
(2) date of admission to The Florida Bar and any other bars, years of
experience practicing law, and a listing of federal courts and jurisdictions other
than Florida where the lawyer is licensed to practice;
(3) technical and professional licenses granted by the state or other
recognized licensing authorities and educational degrees received, including dates
and institutions;
(4) foreign language ability;
(5) fields of law in which the lawyer practices, including official certification
logos, subject to the requirements of rule 4-7.6;
-48-
(6) prepaid or group legal service plans in which the lawyer participates;
(7) acceptance of credit cards;
(8) fee for initial consultation and fee schedule, subject to the requirements
of subdivisions (h) and (i) of this rule;
(9) a listing of the name and geographic location of a lawyer or law firm as a
sponsor of a public service announcement or charitable, civic, or community
program or event; 
(10) common salutary language such as "best wishes", "good luck", "happy
holidays", or "pleased to announce"; and 
(11) a lawyer referral service may advertise its name, location, telephone
number, the referral fee charged, its hours of operation, the process by which
referrals are made, the areas of law in which referrals are offered, the geographic
area in which the lawyers practice to whom those responding to the advertisement
will be referred, and, if applicable, its nonprofit status, its status as a lawyer referral
service approved by The Florida Bar, and the logo of its sponsoring bar
association.
(o) Advertising in Law Directory.  Nothing in this rule prohibits a lawyer
or law firm from permitting the inclusion in law lists and law directories intended
primarily for the use of the legal profession of such information as has traditionally
been included in these publications.
(p) Maintaining Copies of Advertisements.  A copy or recording of an
advertisement or written or recorded communication shall be submitted to the
standing committee on advertising in accordance with the requirements of rule 4-
7.5, and the lawyer shall retain a copy or recording for 3 years after its last
dissemination along with a record of when and where it was used.
(q) Payment for Recommendations; Lawyer Referral Service Fees.   A
lawyer shall not give anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer's
services, except that a lawyer may pay the reasonable cost of advertising or written
or recorded communication permitted by these rules,  may pay the usual charges of
-49-
a lawyer referral service or other legal service organization, and may purchase a
law practice in accordance with rule 4-1.17.
(r)  Language of Required Statements.  Any words or statements required
by this rule, rule 4-7.3, or rule 4-7.4 to appear in an advertisement or direct mail
communication must appear in the same language in which the advertisement
appears.  If more than 1 language is used in an advertisement or direct mail
communication, any words or statements required by this rule, rule 4-7.3, or rule 4-
7.4 must appear in each language used in the advertisement or direct mail
communication.
Comment
To assist the public in obtaining legal services, lawyers should be allowed to
make known their services not only through reputation but also through organized
information campaigns in the form of advertising.  The public's need to know about
legal services can be fulfilled in part through advertising that provides the public
with useful, factual information about legal rights and needs and the availability and
terms of legal services from a particular lawyer or law firm.  This need is
particularly acute in the case of persons of moderate means who have not made
extensive use of legal services.  Nevertheless, certain types of advertising by
lawyers create the risk of practices that are misleading or overreaching and can
create unwarranted expectations by persons untrained in the law.  Such advertising
can also adversely affect the public's confidence and trust in our judicial system.
In order to balance the public's need for useful information, the state's need
to ensure a system by which justice will be administered fairly and properly, as
well as the state's need to regulate and monitor the advertising practices of lawyers,
and a lawyer's right to advertise the availability of the lawyer's services to the
public, this rule permits public dissemination of information concerning a lawyer's
name or firm name, address, and telephone number; the kinds of services the
lawyer will undertake; the basis on which the lawyer's fees are determined,
including prices for specific services and payment and credit arrangements; a
lawyer's foreign language ability; names of references and, with their consent,
names of clients regularly represented; and other factual information that might
invite the attention of those seeking legal assistance.
-50-
Television is now one of the most powerful media for conveying information
to the public; a blanket prohibition against television advertising, therefore, would
impede the flow of information about legal services to many sectors of the public. 
However, the unique characteristics of electronic media, including the
pervasiveness of television and radio, the ease with which these media are abused,
and the passiveness of the viewer or listener, make the electronic media especially
subject to regulation in the public interest.  Therefore, greater restrictions on the
manner of television and radio advertising are justified than might be appropriate
for advertisements in the other media.  To prevent abuses, including potential
interferences with the fair and proper administration of justice and the creation of
incorrect public perceptions or assumptions about the manner in which our legal
system works, and to promote the public's confidence in the legal profession and
this country's system of justice while not interfering with the free flow of useful
information to prospective users of legal services, it is necessary also to restrict the
techniques used in television and radio advertising.
 Subdivisions (b) and (e) of this rule are designed to ensure that the
advertising is not misleading and does not create unreasonable or unrealistic
expectations about the results the lawyer may be able to obtain in any particular
case, and to encourage a focus on providing useful information to the public about
legal rights and needs and the availability and terms of legal services.  Thus, the
rule allows all lawyer advertisements in which the lawyer personally appears to
explain a legal right, the services the lawyer is available to perform, and the
lawyer's background and experience.
This rule governs all communications about a lawyer's services, including
advertising permitted by this subchapter.  Whatever means are used to make known
a lawyer's services, statements about them must be truthful.  This precludes any
material misrepresentation or misleading omission, such as where a lawyer states or
implies certification or recognition as a specialist other than in accordance with this
rule, where a lawyer implies that any court, tribunal, or other public body or official
can be improperly influenced, or where a lawyer advertises a particular fee or a
contingency fee without disclosing whether the client will also be liable for costs. 
Another example of a misleading omission is an advertisement for a law firm that
states that all the firm's lawyers are juris doctors but does not disclose that a juris
doctorate is a law degree rather than a medical degree of some sort and that
virtually any law firm in the United States can make the same claim.  Although this
-51-
rule permits lawyers to list the jurisdictions and courts to which they are admitted,
it also would be misleading for a lawyer who does not list other jurisdictions or
courts to state that the lawyer is a member of The Florida Bar.  Standing by itself,
that otherwise truthful statement implies falsely that the lawyer possesses a
qualification not common to virtually all lawyers practicing in Florida.  The latter 2
examples of misleading omissions also are examples of unfair advertising.
Prohibited information
The prohibition in subdivision (b)(1)(B) of statements that may create
"unjustified expectations" precludes advertisements about results obtained on
behalf of a client, such as the amount of a damage award or the lawyer's record in
obtaining favorable verdicts, and advertisements containing client endorsements or
testimonials.  Such information may create the unjustified expectation that similar
results can be obtained for others without reference to the specific factual and legal
circumstances.
The prohibition in subdivision (b)(1)(D) of comparisons that cannot be
factually substantiated would preclude a lawyer from representing that the lawyer
or the lawyer's law firm is "the best," "one of the best," or "one of the most
experienced" in a field of law.
The prohibition in subdivision (b)(1)(E) precludes endorsements or
testimonials, whether from clients or anyone else, because they are inherently
misleading to a person untrained in the law.  Potential clients are likely to infer
from the testimonial that the lawyer will reach similar results in future cases. 
Because the lawyer cannot directly make this assertion, the lawyer is not permitted
to indirectly make that assertion through the use of testimonials.
The prohibition in subdivision (b) against any background sound other than
instrumental music precludes, for example, the sound of sirens or car crashes and
the use of jingles.   Subdivision 4-7.1(d) forbids use of testimonials or
endorsements from clients or anyone else.   Subdivision (e)(b)(4) prohibits
dramatizations visual or verbal descriptions, depictions, or portrayals in any
advertisement, including those appearing on the electronic media.  This is intended
to preclude the use of scenes which createing suspense, scenes or containing 
exaggerations or appeals to the emotions, situations calling for legal services,
-52-
scenes or createing consumer problems through characterization and dialogue
ending with the lawyer solving the problem, and the audio or video portrayal of an
event or situation.  While informational Iillustrations may attract attention to the
advertisement and help potential clients to understand the advertisement, permitted
under Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel of the Supreme Court of Ohio,
471 U.S. 626 (1985), self-laudatory illustrations are informational and not
misleading, and are therefore permissible inherently misleading and thus prohibited. 
As an example, a drawing of a fist, to suggest the lawyer's ability to achieve results,
would not be informational and would be barred.  Examples of permissible
illustrations would include a graphic rendering of the scales of justice to indicate
that the advertising attorney practices law, a picture of the lawyer, or a map of the
office location.
Regardless of medium, a lawyer's advertisement should provide only useful,
factual information presented in a nonsensational manner.  Advertisements utilizing
slogans or jingles,  oversized electrical and neon signs, or sound trucks fail to meet
these standards and diminish public confidence in the legal system.
The disclosure required by subdivision (d) of this rule is designed to
encourage the informed selection of a lawyer.  As provided in rule 4-7.3, a
prospective client is entitled to know the experience and qualifications of any
lawyer seeking to represent the prospective client.  The required disclosure would
be ineffective if it appeared in an advertisement so briefly or minutely as to be
overlooked or ignored.  Thus in print advertisements, the type size used for the
disclosure must be sufficient to cause the disclosure to be conspicuous; in recorded
advertisements, the disclosure must be spoken at a speed that allows
comprehension by the average listener.  This rule does not specify the exact type
size to be used for the disclosure or the exact speed at which the disclosure may be
spoken; good faith and common sense should serve as adequate guides for any
lawyer.
Neither this rule nor rule 4-7.4 prohibits communications authorized by law,
such as notice to members of a class in class action litigation.
This rule applies to advertisements and written communications directed at
prospective clients and concerning a lawyer's or law firm's availability to provide
-53-
legal services.  The rule does not apply to communications between lawyers,
including brochures used for recruitment purposes.
Communication of fields of practice
This rule permits a lawyer or law firm to indicate areas of practice in
communications about the lawyer's or law firm’s services, such as in a telephone
directory or other advertising, provided the advertising lawyer or law firm actually
practices in those areas of law at the time the advertisement is disseminated.  If a
lawyer practices only in certain fields, or will not accept matters except in such
fields, the lawyer is permitted so to indicate.  However, no lawyer who is not
certified by The Florida Bar or an organization having substantially the same
standards may be described  to the public as a "specialist" or as "specializing."
Paying others to recommend a lawyer
A lawyer is allowed to pay for advertising permitted by this rule and for the
purchase of a law practice in accordance with the provisions of rule 4-1.17, but
otherwise is not permitted to pay or provide other tangible benefits to another
person for procuring professional work.  However, a legal aid agency or prepaid
legal services plan may pay to advertise legal services provided under its auspices. 
Likewise, a lawyer may participate in lawyer referral programs and pay the usual
fees charged by such programs, subject, however, to the limitations imposed by
rule 4-7.811.  Subdivision (q)(c)(8) does not prohibit paying regular compensation
to an assistant, such as a secretary or advertising consultant, to prepare
communications permitted by this rule.
-54-
RULE 4-7.3   LEGAL SERVICE  INFORMATION ADVERTISEMENTS IN
THE PUBLIC PRINT MEDIA
(a)  Information Regarding Qualifications.  Each lawyer or law firm that
advertises the lawyer's or law firm's availability to provide legal services shall have
available in written form for delivery to any potential client: Generally. 
Advertisements disseminated in the public print media are subject to the
requirements of rule 4-7.2.
(1) a factual statement detailing the background, training, and experience of
each lawyer or the law firm; 
(2) if the lawyer or law firm claims special expertise in the representation of
clients in special matters or publicly limits the lawyer's or law firm's practice to
special types of cases or clients,  written information  setting forth the factual
details of the lawyer's experience, expertise, background, and training in such
matters.  
(b)  Information to be Included in Written Communications.  A lawyer
or law firm that advertises services by written communication not involving
solicitation, as defined in rule 4-7.4, shall enclose with each such written
communication the information described in subdivision (a) of this rule.Disclosure
Statement.  Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, all advertisements
other than lawyer referral service advertisements shall contain the following
disclosure:  "The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be
based solely upon advertisements.  Before you decide, ask us to send you free
written information about our qualifications and experience."  Lawyer referral
service advertisements shall contain the following disclosure:  "The hiring of a
lawyer is an important decision.  Before you decide to hire the lawyer to whom you
are referred, ask that lawyer for written information about that lawyer's
qualifications and experience."  Outdoor advertisements may contain, in lieu of the
above disclosure, the following abbreviated version:  "Before choosing a lawyer,
ask for written information about the lawyer's legal qualifications and experience." 
Disclosure statements must appear in type that is clearly legible and is no smaller
than one-fourth of the size of the largest type otherwise appearing in the
advertisement.  These disclosures, however, need not appear in advertisements in
the public print media that contain no illustrations and no information other than
-55-
that listed in subdivision (c)(10) of rule 4-7.2, or written communications sent in
compliance with rule 4-7.4.
(c) Request for Information by Potential Client.  Whenever a potential
client shall request information regarding a lawyer or law firm for the purpose of
making a decision regarding employment of the lawyer or law firm: 
(1)  The lawyer or law firm shall promptly furnish (by mail if requested) the
written information described in subdivision (a).
(2)  The lawyer or law firm may furnish such additional factual information
regarding the lawyer or law firm deemed valuable to assist the client.
(3)  If it is believed that the client is in need of services that will require that
the client read and sign a copy of the "Statement of Client's Rights" as required by
these rules, then a copy of such statement shall be furnished contemporaneously
with the above information.
(4)  If the information furnished to the client includes a fee contract, the top
of each page of the contract shall be marked "SAMPLE" in red ink in a type size
one size larger than the largest type used in the contract and the words "DO NOT
SIGN" shall appear on the client signature line.
(d) Retention of Copies of Information.  A copy of all information
furnished to clients by reason of this rule shall be retained by the lawyer or law firm
for a period of 3 years after last regular use of the information.
(e) Disclosure Statement.  If the lawyer or law firm advertises its services
pursuant to rule 4-7.2, the advertisement shall contain the disclosure set forth in
rule 4-7.2(d) unless exempt by the terms of that rule.  This disclosure need not
appear in written communications under rule 4-7.4, which must be accompanied by
a copy of the statement of qualifications and experience described in  subdivision
(a) of this rule.
(f) Misleading or Deceptive Statements.  Any factual statement contained
in any advertisement or written communication or any information furnished to a
prospective client under this rule shall not:
-56-
(1) be directly or impliedly false or misleading;
(2) be potentially false or misleading;
(3) fail to disclose material information necessary to prevent the informa
tion supplied from being actually or potentially false or misleading;
(4) be unsubstantiated in fact; or
(5) be unfair or deceptive.
(g) Proof of Statements or Claims.  Upon reasonable request by The
Florida Bar, a lawyer shall promptly provide proof that any statement or claim
made in any advertisement or written communication, as well as the information
furnished to a prospective client as authorized or required by these rules, is in
compliance with subdivision (f) above. 
(h) Disclosure of Intent to Refer Matter to Another Lawyer or Law
Firm.  A statement and any information furnished to a prospective client, as
authorized by subdivision (a) of this rule, that a lawyer or law firm will represent a
client in a particular type of matter, without appropriate qualification, shall be
presumed to be misleading if the lawyer reasonably believes that a lawyer or law
firm not associated with the originally retained lawyer or law firm will be
associated or act as primary counsel in representing the client.  In determining
whether the statement is misleading in this respect, the history of prior conduct by
the lawyer in similar matters may be considered.
Comment
Consumers and potential clients have a right to receive factual, objective
information from lawyers who are advertising their availability to handle legal
matters.  The rule provides that potential clients may request such information and
be given an opportunity to review that information without being required to come
to a lawyer's office to obtain it.  Selection of appropriate counsel is based upon a
number of factors.  However, selection can be enhanced by potential clients having
factual information at their disposal for review and comparison. 
-57-
The disclosure required by this rule is designed to encourage the informed
selection of a lawyer.  A prospective client is entitled to know the experience and
qualifications of any lawyer seeking to represent the prospective client.  The
required disclosure would be ineffective if it appeared in an advertisement so
briefly or minutely as to be overlooked or ignored.  Thus the type size to be used
for the disclosure is specified to ensure that the disclosure will be conspicuous.
-58-
RULE 4-7.4   DIRECT CONTACT WITH PROSPECTIVE CLIENTS
(a)  Solicitation.  Except as provided in subdivision (b) of this rule, A a
lawyer shall not solicit professional employment from a prospective client with
whom the lawyer has no family or prior professional relationship, in person or
otherwise, when a significant motive for the lawyer's doing so is the lawyer's
pecuniary gain.  A lawyer shall not permit employees or agents of the lawyer to
solicit in the lawyer's behalf.  A lawyer shall not enter into an agreement for,
charge, or collect a fee for professional employment obtained in violation of this
rule.  The term "solicit" includes contact in person, by telephone, telegraph, or
facsimile, or by other communication directed to a specific recipient and includes
(i) any written form of communication directed to a specific recipient and not
meeting the requirements of subdivision (b) of this rule, and (ii) any electronic mail
communication directed to a specific recipient and not meeting the requirements of
subdivision (c) of rule 4-7.6.
(b)  Written Communication.
(1)  A lawyer shall not send, or knowingly permit to be sent, on the lawyer's
behalf or on behalf of the lawyer's firm or partner, an associate, or any other lawyer
affiliated with the lawyer or the lawyer's firm, a written communication directly or
indirectly  to a prospective client for the purpose of obtaining professional
employment if:
(A)  the written communication concerns an action for personal injury or
wrongful death or otherwise relates to an accident or disaster involving the person
to whom the communication is addressed or a relative of that person, unless the
accident or disaster occurred more than 30 days prior to the mailing of the
communication;
(B)  the written communication concerns a specific matter and the lawyer
knows or reasonably should know that the person to whom the communication is
directed is represented by a lawyer in the matter;
(C)  it has been made known to the lawyer that the person does not want to
receive such communications from the lawyer;
-59-
(D)  the communication involves coercion, duress, fraud, overreaching,
harassment, intimidation, or undue influence;
(E)  the communication contains a false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, or
unfair statement or claim or is improper under subdivision (b)(1) of rule 4-7.1 4-
7.2; or
(F)  the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the physical,
emotional, or mental state of the person makes it unlikely that the person would
exercise reasonable judgment in employing a lawyer.
(2)  Written communications to prospective clients for the purpose of
obtaining professional employment are subject to the following requirements:
(A)  Each page of such written communications shall be plainly marked
"advertisement" in red ink, and the lower left corner of the face of the envelope
containing a written communication likewise shall carry a prominent, red
"advertisement" mark.  If the written communication is in the form of a self-mailing
brochure or pamphlet, the "advertisement" mark in red ink shall appear on the
address panel of the brochure or pamphlet.  Brochures solicited by clients or
prospective clients need not contain the "advertisement" mark.Written
communications to a prospective client are subject to the requirements of rule 4-
7.2.
(B)  A copy of each such written communication and a sample of the
envelopes in which the communications are enclosed shall be filed with the
standing committee on advertising either prior to or concurrently with the mailing
of the communication to a prospective client, as provided in rule 4-7.5.  The lawyer
also shall retain a copy of each written communication for 3 years.  If identical
written communications are sent to 2 or more prospective clients, the lawyer may
comply with this requirement by filing 1 of the identical written communications
and retaining for 3 years a single copy together with a list of the names and
addresses of persons to whom the written communication was sent.The first page
of such written communications shall be plainly marked "advertisement" in red ink,
and the lower left corner of the face of the envelope containing a written
communication likewise shall carry a prominent, red "advertisement" mark.  If the
written communication is in the form of a self-mailing brochure or pamphlet, the
-60-
"advertisement" mark in red ink shall appear on the address panel of the brochure
or pamphlet and on the inside of the brochure or pamphlet.  Brochures solicited by
clients or prospective clients need not contain the "advertisement" mark.
(C)  Written communications mailed to prospective clients shall be sent only
by regular U.S. mail, not by registered mail or other forms of restricted delivery.A
copy of each such written communication and a sample of the envelopes in which
the communications are enclosed shall be filed with the standing committee on
advertising either prior to or concurrently with the mailing of the communication to
a prospective client, as provided in rule 4-7.7.  The lawyer also shall retain a copy
of each written communication for 3 years.  If identical written communications are
sent to 2 or more prospective clients, the lawyer may comply with this requirement
by filing 1 of the identical written communications and retaining for 3 years a single
copy together with a list of the names and addresses of persons to whom the
written communication was sent.
(D)  No reference shall be made in the communication to the
communication's having received any kind of approval from The Florida
Bar.Written communications mailed to prospective clients shall be sent only by
regular U.S. mail, not by registered mail or other forms of restricted delivery.
(E)  Every written communication shall be accompanied by a written
statement of the lawyer's or law firm's qualifications conforming to the
requirements of rule 4-7.3.No reference shall be made in the communication to the
communication's having received any kind of approval from The Florida Bar.
(F)  If a contract for representation is mailed with the written
communication, the top of each page of the contract shall be marked "SAMPLE" in
red ink in a type size 1 size larger than the largest type used in the contract and the
words "DO NOT SIGN" shall appear on the client signature line.Every written
communication shall be accompanied by a written statement detailing the
background, training and experience of the lawyer or law firm.  This statement
must include information about the specific experience of the advertising lawyer or
law firm in the area or areas of law for which professional employment is sought. 
Every written communication disseminated by a lawyer referral service shall be
accompanied by a written statement detailing the background, training, and
experience of each lawyer to whom the recipient may be referred.
-61-
(G)  The first sentence of any written communication concerning a specific
matter shall be:  "If you have already retained a lawyer for this matter, please
disregard this letter."If a contract for representation is mailed with the written
communication, the top of each page of the contract shall be marked "SAMPLE" in
red ink in a type size 1 size larger than the largest type used in the contract and the
words "DO NOT SIGN" shall appear on the client signature line.
(H)  Written communications shall be on letter-sized paper rather than legal-
sized paper and shall not be made to resemble legal pleadings or other legal
documents.  This provision does not preclude the mailing of brochures and
pamphlets.The first sentence of any written communication prompted by a specific
occurrence involving or affecting the intended recipient of the communication or a
family member shall be:  "If you have already retained a lawyer for this matter,
please disregard this letter."
(I)  If a lawyer other than the lawyer whose name or signature appears on the
communication will actually handle the case or matter, or if the case or matter will
be referred to another lawyer or law firm, any written communication concerning a
specific matter shall include a statement so advising the client.Written
communications shall be on letter-sized paper rather than legal-sized paper and
shall not be made to resemble legal pleadings or other legal documents.  This
provision does not preclude the mailing of brochures and pamphlets.
(J)  Any written communication prompted by a specific occurrence involving
or affecting the intended recipient of the communication or a family member shall
disclose how the lawyer obtained the information prompting the communication.If a
lawyer other than the lawyer whose name or signature appears on the
communication will actually handle the case or matter, or if the case or matter will
be referred to another lawyer or law firm, any written communication concerning a
specific matter shall include a statement so advising the client.
(K)  A written communication seeking employment by a specific prospective
client in a specific matter shall not reveal on the envelope, or on the outside of a
self-mailing brochure or pamphlet, the nature of the client's legal problem.Any
written communication prompted by a specific occurrence involving or affecting the
intended recipient of the communication or a family member shall disclose how the
lawyer obtained the information prompting the communication.  The disclosure
-62-
required by this rule shall be specific enough to help the recipient understand the
extent of the lawyer's knowledge regarding the recipient's particular situation.
(L)  A written communication seeking employment by a specific prospective
client in a specific matter shall not reveal on the envelope, or on the outside of a
self-mailing brochure or pamphlet, the nature of the client's legal problem.
Comment
There is a potential for abuse inherent in direct solicitation by a lawyer of
prospective clients known to need legal services.  It subjects the person to the
private importuning of a trained advocate, in a direct interpersonal encounter.  A
prospective client often feels overwhelmed by the situation giving rise to the need
for legal services and may have an impaired capacity for reason, judgment, and
protective self-interest.  Furthermore, the lawyer seeking the retainer is faced with a
conflict stemming from the lawyer's own interest, which may color the advice and
representation offered the vulnerable prospect.
The situation is therefore fraught with the possibility of undue influence,
intimidation, and overreaching.  This potential for abuse inherent in direct
solicitation of prospective clients justifies the 30-day restriction, particularly since
lawyer advertising permitted under these rules 4-7.2 offers an alternative means of
communicating necessary information to those who may be in need of legal
services.
Advertising makes it possible for a prospective client to be informed about
the need for legal services, and about the qualifications of available lawyers and
law firms, without subjecting the prospective client to direct personal persuasion
that may overwhelm the client's judgment.
The use of general advertising to transmit information from lawyer to
prospective client, rather than direct private contact, will help to assure that the
information flows cleanly as well as freely.  Advertising is out in public view, thus
subject to scrutiny by those who know the lawyer.  This informal review is itself
likely to help guard against statements and claims that might constitute false or
misleading communications in violation of rule 4-7.1.  Direct private
communications from a lawyer to a prospective client are not subject to such third-
-63-
party scrutiny and consequently are much more likely to approach (and
occasionally perhaps cross) the dividing line between accurate representations and
those that are false and misleading.
Direct written communications seeking employment by specific prospective
clients generally present less potential for abuse or overreaching than in-person
solicitation and are therefore not prohibited for most types of legal matters, but are
subject to reasonable restrictions, as set forth in this rule, designed to minimize or
preclude abuse and overreaching and to ensure lawyer accountability if such should
occur.  This rule allows targeted mail solicitation of potential plaintiffs or claimants
in personal injury and wrongful death causes of action or other causes of action that
relate to an accident, disaster, death, or injury, but only if mailed at least 30 days
after the incident.  This restriction is reasonably required by the sensitized state of
the potential clients, who may be either injured or grieving over the loss of a family
member, and the abuses that experience has shown exist in this type of solicitation.
Letters of solicitation and their envelopes should must be clearly marked
"advertisement."  This will avoid the recipient's perceiving that there is a need to
open the envelope because it is from a lawyer or law firm, only to find the recipient
is being solicited for legal services.  With the envelope and letter marked
"advertisement," the recipient can choose to read the solicitation, or not to read it,
without fear of legal repercussions.
In addition, the lawyer or law firm should reveal the source of information
used to determine that the recipient has a potential legal problem.  Disclosure of the
information source will help the recipient to understand the extent of knowledge the
lawyer or law firm has regarding the recipient's particular situation and will avoid
misleading the recipient into believing that the lawyer has particularized knowledge
about the recipient's matter if the lawyer does not.
This rule would not prohibit a lawyer from contacting representatives of
organizations or groups that may be interested in establishing a group or prepaid
legal plan for its members, insureds, beneficiaries, or other third parties for the
purpose of informing such entities of the availability of and details concerning the
plan or arrangement that the lawyer or the lawyer's law firm is willing to offer. 
This form of communication is not directed to a specific prospective client known
to need legal services related to a particular matter.  Rather, it is usually addressed
-64-
to an individual acting in a fiduciary capacity seeking a supplier of legal services
for others who may, if they choose, become prospective clients of the lawyer. 
Under these circumstances, the activity that the lawyer undertakes in
communicating with such representatives and the type of information transmitted to
the individual are functionally similar to and serve the same purpose as advertising
permitted under other rules 4-7.2 in this subchapter.
-65-
RULE 4-7.5  EVALUATION OF ADVERTISEMENTSADVERTISEMENTS
IN THE ELECTRONIC MEDIA OTHER THAN COMPUTER-ACCESSED
COMMUNICATIONS
(a) Advisory Opinion.  A lawyer may obtain an advisory opinion
concerning the compliance of a contemplated advertisement or written
communication with these rules in advance of disseminating the advertisement or
communication by submitting the material and fee specified in subdivision (d) to
the standing committee on advertising at least 15 days prior to such dissemination. 
If the committee finds that the advertisement complies with these rules, the lawyer's
voluntary submission shall be deemed to satisfy the filing requirement set forth in
subdivision (b) of this rule.Generally.  With the exception of computer-based
advertisements (which are subject to the special requirements set forth in rule 4-
7.6), all advertisements in the electronic media, including but not limited to
television and radio, are subject to the requirements of rule 4-7.2.
(b) Filing Copy of Advertisement.  Subject to the exemptions stated in
subdivision (c) of this rule, any lawyer who advertises services through any public
media or through written communication not involving solicitation as defined in
rule 4-7.4 shall file a copy of each such advertisement with the standing committee
on advertising for evaluation of compliance with these rules.  The copy shall be
filed either prior to or concurrently with the lawyer's first dissemination of the
advertisement or written communication and shall be accompanied by the
information and fee specified in subdivision (d).Appearance on Television or
Radio.   Advertisements on the electronic media such as television and radio may
contain, but are not necessarily limited to containing, some or all of the information
listed in rule 4-7.2(c)(10).  The information shall be articulated by a single human
voice, or on-screen text, with no background sound other than instrumental music. 
No person’s voice or image, other than that of a lawyer who is a member of the
firm whose services are advertised, may be used in a television or radio
advertisement.  Visual images appearing in a television advertisement shall be
limited to the advertising lawyer in front of a background consisting of a single
solid color, a set of law books in an unadorned bookcase, or the lawyer's own
office (with no other office personnel shown).  A limited exception applies to
lawyer referral service advertisements permitted under rule 4-7.11, insofar as a
non-attorney spokesperson may speak or appear on behalf of the participating
attorneys in television or radio advertisements.  If such a spokesperson is used, the
-66-
spokesperson shall provide a spoken disclosure identifying herself or himself as a
spokesperson and disclosing that she or he is not an attorney.  Television and radio
advertisements by lawyer referral services are otherwise subject to the
requirements of this rule.
(c) Exemptions from Filing Requirement.  The following are exempt from
the filing requirements of subdivision (b) of this rule :
(1)  Any advertisement in any of the public media, including the yellow
pages of telephone directories, that contains no illustrations and no information
other than that set forth in rule 4-7.2(n)(1)-(11).  This exemption extends to
television advertisements only if the visual display featured in such advertisements
is limited to the words spoken by the announcer.
(2)  A brief announcement in any of the public media that identifies a lawyer
or law firm as a contributor to a specified charity or as a sponsor of a public service
announcement or a  specified charitable, community, or public interest program,
activity, or event, provided that the announcement contains no information about
the lawyer or law firm other than name, the city where the law offices are located,
and the fact of the sponsorship or contribution.  In determining whether an
announcement is a public service announcement for purposes of this rule and rule
4-7.2(n)(9), the following are criteria that may be considered:
(A)  whether the content of the announcement appears to serve the particular
interests of the lawyer or law firm as much as or more than the interests of the
public;
(B)  whether the announcement contains information concerning the lawyer’s
or law firm’s area of practice, legal background, or experience;
(C)  whether the announcement contains the address or telephone number of
the lawyer or law firm;
(D)  whether the announcement concerns a legal subject;
(E)  whether the announcement contains legal advice; and
-67-
(F)  whether the lawyer or law firm paid to have the announcement
published.
(3)  A listing or entry in a law list or bar publication.
(4)  A newsletter mailed only to existing clients, former clients, or other
lawyers.
(5) Any written communications requested by a prospective client.
(6)  Professional announcement cards stating new or changed associations,
new offices, and similar changes relating to a lawyer or law firm, and that are
mailed only to other lawyers, relatives, close personal friends, former clients, and
existing clients.
(d) Contents of Filing.  A filing with the committee as required by
subdivision (b) or as permitted by subdivision (a) shall consist of:
(1) a copy of the advertisement or communication in the form or forms in
which it is to be disseminated (e.g., videotapes, audiotapes, print media,
photographs of outdoor advertising);
(2) a transcript, if the advertisement or communication is on videotape or
audiotape;
(3) a statement listing all media in which the advertisement or
communication will appear, the anticipated frequency of use of the advertisement
or communication in each medium in which it will appear, and the anticipated time
period during which the advertisement or communication will be used; and
(4) a fee paid to The Florida Bar, in an amount of $100 for submissions
timely filed as provided in subdivisions (a) or (b), or $250 for submissions not
timely filed.  This fee shall be used to offset the cost of evaluation and review of
advertisements submitted under these rules and  the cost of enforcing these rules.
(e) Evaluation of Advertisements.  The committee shall evaluate all
advertisements and written communications filed with it pursuant to this rule for
-68-
compliance with the applicable rules set forth in this subchapter 4-7.  The
committee shall complete its evaluation within 15 days of receipt of a filing unless
the committee determines that there is reasonable doubt that the advertisement or
written communication is in compliance with the rules and that further examination
is warranted but cannot be completed within the 15-day period, and so advises the
lawyer within the 15-day period.  In the latter event, the committee shall complete
its review as promptly as the circumstances reasonably allow.  If the committee
does not send any communication to the lawyer within 15 days, the advertisement
will be deemed approved.
(f) Substantiating Information.  If requested to do so by the committee, the
filing lawyer shall submit information to substantiate representations made or
implied in that lawyer's advertisement or written communication.
(g) Notice of Noncompliance; Effect of Continued Use of Advertisement. 
When the committee determines that an advertisement or written communication is
not in compliance with the applicable rules, the committee shall advise the lawyer
that dissemination or continued dissemination of the advertisement or written
communication may result in professional discipline.
(h) Committee Determination Not Binding; Evidence.  A finding by the
committee of either compliance or noncompliance shall not be binding in a
grievance proceeding, but may be offered as evidence.
(i) Change of Circumstances; Refiling Requirement.  If a change of
circumstances occurring subsequent to the committee's evaluation of an
advertisement or written communication raises a substantial possibility that the
advertisement or communication has become false or misleading as a result of the
change in circumstances, the lawyer shall promptly refile the advertisement or a
modified advertisement with the committee along with an explanation of the change
in circumstances and an additional fee set by the board of governors but not
exceeding $100.
Comment
This rule has a dual purpose:  to enhance the court's and the bar's ability to
monitor advertising practices for the protection of the public and to assist members
-69-
of the bar to conform their advertisements to the requirements of these rules.  This
rule gives lawyers the option of submitting their advertisements to the committee
for review prior to first use or submitting their advertisements at the time of first
use.  In either event, the committee will advise the filing lawyer in writing whether
the advertisement appears to comply with the rules.  The committee's opinion will
be advisory only, but may be considered as evidence of a good faith effort to
comply with these rules.  A lawyer who wishes to be able to rely on the
committee's opinion as demonstrating the lawyer's good faith effort to comply with
these rules has the responsibility of supplying the committee with all information
material to a determination of whether an advertisement is false or misleading.
In The Florida Bar v. Doe, 634 So. 2d 160 (Fla. 1994), the court recognized
the need for specific guidelines to aid lawyers and the bar in determining whether a
particular announcement in the public media is a public service announcement as
contemplated in the rule and rule 4-7.2(n).  Subdivisions (c)(2)(A)-(F) of this rule
respond to the court’s concern by setting forth criteria that, while not intended to be
exclusive, provide the needed guidance.  With the exception of subdivision
(c)(2)(C), these criteria are based on factors considered by the court in Doe.
Television is now one of the most powerful media for conveying information
to the public; a blanket prohibition against television advertising, therefore, would
impede the flow of information about legal services to many sectors of the public. 
However, the unique characteristics of electronic media, including the
pervasiveness of television and radio, the ease with which these media are abused,
and the passiveness of the viewer or listener, make the electronic media especially
subject to regulation in the public interest.  Therefore, greater restrictions on the
manner of television and radio advertising are justified than might be appropriate
for advertisements in the other media.  To prevent abuses, including potential
interferences with the fair and proper administration of justice and the creation of
incorrect public perceptions or assumptions about the manner in which our legal
system works, and to promote the public's confidence in the legal profession and
this country's system of justice while not interfering with the free flow of useful
information to prospective users of legal services, it is necessary also to restrict the
techniques used in television and radio advertising.
This rule is designed to ensure that the advertising is not misleading and does
not create unreasonable or unrealistic expectations about the results the 
-70-
lawyer may be able to obtain in any particular case, and to encourage the provision
of useful information to the public about the availability and terms of legal services. 
Thus, the rule allows lawyer advertisements in which a lawyer who is a member of
the advertising firm personally appears to speak regarding the legal services the
lawyer or law firm is available to perform, the fees to be charged for such services,
and the background and experience of the lawyer or law firm.  A firm partner or
shareholder, of course, is a "member" of a law firm within the intent of the rule; 
likewise, a lawyer who is a law firm associate as defined in The Florida Bar v.
Fetterman, 439 So.2d 835 (Fla. 1983) is a firm "member."  Whether other lawyers
are "members" of a firm for purposes of this rule must be evaluated in light of
criteria that include whether the lawyer's practice is physically located at the firm
and whether the lawyer practices solely through the firm.  There should be a
presumption that lawyers other than partners, shareholders, or associates are not
"members" of a law firm for purposes of this rule.
-71-
RULE 4-7.6   COMMUNICATION OF FIELDS OF
PRACTICECOMPUTER-ACCESSED COMMUNICATIONS
A lawyer may communicate the fact that the lawyer does or does not practice
in particular fields of law.  A lawyer shall not state or imply that the lawyer is a
specialist except as follows:
(a) Patent Practice.  A lawyer admitted to engage in patent practice before
the United States patent and trademark office may use the designation "patent
attorney" or a substantially similar designation.Definition.  For purposes of this
subchapter, "computer-accessed communications" are defined as information
regarding a lawyer's or law firm's services that is read, viewed, or heard directly
through the use of a computer.  Computer-accessed communications include, but
are not limited to, Internet presences such as home pages or World Wide Web
sites, unsolicited electronic mail communications, and information concerning a
lawyer's or law firm's services that appears on World Wide Web search engine
screens and elsewhere.
(b) Certified Lawyers.  A lawyer who complies with the Florida
certification plan as set forth in chapter 6, Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, or
who is certified by an organization whose specialty certification program has been
accredited by the American Bar Association may inform the public and other
lawyers of the lawyer's certified areas of legal practice and may state in
communications to the public that the lawyer is a "specialist in (area of
certification)."Internet Presence.  All World Wide Web sites and home pages
accessed via the Internet that are controlled or sponsored by a lawyer or law firm
and that contain information concerning the lawyer's or law firm's services:
(1)  shall disclose all jurisdictions in which the lawyer or members of the law
firm are licensed to practice law;
(2)  shall disclose 1 or more bona fide office locations of the lawyer or law
firm, in accordance with subdivision (a)(2) of rule 4-7.2; and
(3)  are considered to be information provided upon request and, therefore,
are otherwise governed by the requirements of rule 4-7.9.
-72-
(c)  Electronic Mail Communications.  A lawyer shall not send, or
knowingly permit to be sent, on the lawyer's behalf or on behalf of the lawyer's firm
or partner, an associate, or any other lawyer affiliated with the lawyer or the
lawyer's firm, an unsolicited electronic mail communication directly or indirectly to
a prospective client for the purpose of obtaining professional employment unless:
(1)  the requirements of subdivisions (b)(1), (b)(2)(A), (b)(2)(E), (b)(2)(G),
(b)(2)(H), (b)(2)(J), and (b)(2)(K) of rule 4-7.4 are met;
(2)  the communication discloses 1 or more bona fide office locations of the
lawyer or lawyers who will actually perform the services advertised, in accordance
with subdivision (a)(2) of rule 4-7.2; and
(3)  the subject line of the communication states "legal advertisement."
(d)  Advertisements.  All computer-accessed communications concerning a
lawyer's or law firm's services, other than those subject to subdivisions (b) and (c)
of this rule, are subject to the requirements of rule 4-7.2.
Comment
This rule permits a lawyer to indicate areas of practice in communications
about the lawyer's services, such as in a telephone directory or other advertising.  If
a lawyer practices only in certain fields, or will not accept matters except in such
fields, the lawyer is permitted so to indicate.  However, no lawyer who is not
certified by The Florida Bar or an organization having substantially the same
standards may be described  to the public as a "specialist" or as "specializing.”
Advances in telecommunications and computer technology allow lawyers to
communicate with other lawyers, clients, prospective clients, and others in
increasingly quicker and more efficient ways.  Regardless of the particular
technology used, however, a lawyer's communications with prospective clients for
the purpose of obtaining professional employment must meet standards designed to
protect the public from false, deceptive, misleading, or confusing messages about
lawyers or the legal system and to encourage the free flow of useful legal-related
information to the public.
-73-
The specific regulations that govern computer-accessed communications
differ according to the particular variety of communication employed.  For
example, a lawyer's Internet web site is accessed by the viewer upon the viewer's
initiative and, accordingly, the standards governing such communications
correspond to the rules applicable to information provided to a prospective client at
the prospective client's request.
In contrast, unsolicited electronic mail messages from lawyers to prospective
clients are functionally comparable to direct mail communications and thus are
governed by similar rules.  Additionally, communications advertising or promoting
a lawyer's services that are posted on search engine screens or elsewhere by the
lawyer, or at the lawyer's behest, with the hope that they will be seen by
prospective clients are simply a form of lawyer advertising and are treated as such
by the rules.
This rule is not triggered merely because someone other than the lawyer
gratuitously links to, or comments on, a lawyer's Internet web site.
-74-
RULE 4-7.7  FIRM NAMES AND LETTERHEADSEVALUATION OF
ADVERTISEMENTS
(a) False, Misleading, or Deceptive.  A lawyer shall not use a firm name,
letterhead, or other professional designation that violates rule 4-7.1.Filing and
Advisory Opinion.  Subject to the exemptions stated in rule 4-7.8, any lawyer who
advertises services through any public media or through written communications
sent in compliance with rule 4-7.4 shall file a copy of each such advertisement with
the standing committee on advertising for evaluation of compliance with these
rules.  The copy shall be filed either prior to or concurrently with the lawyer's first
dissemination of the advertisement or written communication and shall be
accompanied by the information and fee specified in subdivision (b) of this rule.  A
lawyer may obtain an advisory opinion concerning the compliance of a
contemplated advertisement or written communication in advance of disseminating
the advertisement or communication by submitting the material and fee specified in
subdivision (b) of this rule to the standing committee on advertising at least 15 days
prior to such dissemination.  If the committee finds that the advertisement complies
with these rules, the lawyer's voluntary submission shall be deemed to satisfy the
filing requirement set forth in this rule.
(b) Trade Names.  A lawyer may practice under a trade name if the name is
not deceptive and does not imply a connection with a government agency or with a
public or charitable legal services organization, does not imply that the firm is
something other than a private law firm, and is not otherwise in violation of rule 4-
7.1.  A lawyer in private practice may use the term "legal clinic" or "legal services"
in conjunction with the lawyer's own name if the lawyer's practice is devoted to
providing routine legal services for fees that are lower than the prevailing rate in the
community for those services.Contents of Filing.  A filing with the committee as
required or permitted by subdivision (a) shall consist of:
(1)  a copy of the advertisement or communication in the form or forms in
which it is to be disseminated (e.g., videotapes, audiotapes, print media,
photographs of outdoor advertising);
(2)  a transcript, if the advertisement or communication is on videotape or
audiotape;
-75-
(3)  a sample envelope in which the written communication will be enclosed,
if the communication is to be mailed;
(4)  a statement listing all media in which the advertisement or
communication will appear, the anticipated frequency of use of the advertisement
or communication in each medium in which it will appear, and the anticipated time
period during which the advertisement or communication will be used; and
(5)  a fee paid to The Florida Bar, in an amount of $100 for submissions
timely filed as provided in subdivision (a), or $250 for submissions not timely filed. 
This fee shall be used to offset the cost of evaluation and review of advertisements
submitted under these rules and the cost of enforcing these rules.
(c) Advertising under Trade Name.  A lawyer shall not advertise under a
trade or fictitious name, except that a lawyer who actually practices under a trade
name as authorized by subdivision (b) may use that name in advertisements.  A
lawyer who advertises under a trade or fictitious name shall be in violation of this
rule unless the same name is the law firm name that appears on the lawyer's
letterhead, business cards, office sign, and fee contracts, and appears with the
lawyer's signature on pleadings and other legal documents.Evaluation of
Advertisements.  The committee shall evaluate all advertisements and written
communications filed with it pursuant to this rule for compliance with the
applicable rules set forth in this subchapter 4-7.  The committee shall complete its
evaluation within 15 days of receipt of a filing unless the committee determines that
there is reasonable doubt that the advertisement or written communication is in
compliance with the rules and that further examination is warranted but cannot be
completed within the 15-day period, and so advises the filer within the 15-day
period.  In the latter event, the committee shall complete its review as promptly as
the circumstances reasonably allow.  If the committee does not send any
communication to the filer within 15 days, the advertisement will be deemed
approved.
(d) Law Firm with Offices in More Than 1 Jurisdiction.  A law firm with
offices in more than 1 jurisdiction may use the same name in each jurisdiction, but
identification of the lawyers in an office of the firm shall indicate the jurisdictional
limitations on those not licensed to practice in the jurisdiction where the office is
located.Substantiating Information.  If requested to do so by the committee, the
-76-
filing lawyer shall submit information to substantiate representations made or
implied in that lawyer's advertisement or written communication.
(e) Name of Public Officer in Firm Name.  The name of a lawyer holding
a public office shall not be used in the name of a law firm, or in communications on
its behalf, during any substantial period in which the lawyer is not actively and
regularly practicing with the firm.Notice of Noncompliance; Effect of Continued
Use of Advertisement.  When the committee determines that an advertisement or
written communication is not in compliance with the applicable rules, the
committee shall advise the lawyer that dissemination or continued dissemination of
the advertisement or written communication may result in professional discipline.
(f) Partnerships.  Lawyers may state or imply that they practice in a
partnership or other organization only when that is the fact.Committee
Determination Not Binding; Evidence.  A finding by the committee of either
compliance or noncompliance shall not be binding in a grievance proceeding, but
may be offered as evidence.
(g)  Change of Circumstances; Refiling Requirement.  If a change of
circumstances occurring subsequent to the committee's evaluation of an
advertisement or written communication raises a substantial possibility that the
advertisement or communication has become false or misleading as a result of the
change in circumstances, the lawyer shall promptly refile the advertisement or a
modified advertisement with the committee along with an explanation of the change
in circumstances and an additional fee set by the board of governors but not
exceeding $100.
(h)  Maintaining Copies of Advertisements.  A copy or recording of an
advertisement or written or recorded communication shall be submitted to the
standing committee on advertising in accordance with the requirements of rule 4-
7.7, and the lawyer shall retain a copy or recording for 3 years after its last
dissemination along with a record of when and where it was used.
Comment
A firm may be designated by the names of all or some of its members, by the
names of deceased members where there has been a continuing succession in the
-77-
firm's identity, or by a trade name such as "Family Legal Clinic."  Although the
United States Supreme Court has held that legislation may prohibit the use of trade
names in professional practice, use of such names in law practice is acceptable so
long as it is not misleading.  If a private firm uses a trade name that includes a
geographical name such as "Springfield Legal Clinic," an express disclaimer that it
is a public legal aid agency may be required to avoid a misleading implication.  It
may be observed that any firm name including the name of a deceased partner is,
strictly speaking, a trade name.  The use of such names to designate law firms has
proven a useful means of identification.  However, it is misleading to use the name
of a lawyer not associated with the firm or a predecessor of the firm.
Subdivision (a) precludes use in a law firm name of terms that imply that the
firm is something other than a private law firm.  Two examples of such terms are
"academy" and "institute."   Subdivision (b) precludes use of a trade or fictitious
name suggesting that the firm is named for a person when in fact such a person
does not exist or is not associated with the firm.  An example of such an improper
name is "A. Aaron Able."  Although not prohibited per se, the terms "legal clinic"
and "legal services" would be misleading if used by a law firm that did not devote
its practice to providing routine legal services at prices below those prevailing in
the community for like services.
Subdivision (c) of this rule precludes a lawyer from advertising under a
nonsense name designed to obtain an advantageous position for the lawyer in
alphabetical directory listings unless the lawyer actually practices under that
nonsense name.  Advertising under a law firm name that differs from the firm name
under which the lawyer actually practices violates both this rule and rule 4-7.1
With regard to subdivision (d), lawyers sharing office facilities, but who are
not in fact partners, may not denominate themselves as, for example, "Smith and
Jones," for that title suggests partnership in the practice of law.This rule has a dual
purpose:  to enhance the court's and the bar's ability to monitor advertising
practices for the protection of the public and to assist members of the bar to
conform their advertisements to the requirements of these rules.  This rule gives
lawyers the option of submitting their advertisements to the committee for review
prior to first use or submitting their advertisements at the time of first use.  In either
event, the committee will advise the filing lawyer in writing whether the
advertisement appears to comply with the rules.  The committee's opinion will be
-78-
advisory only, but may be considered as evidence of a good faith effort to comply
with these rules.  A lawyer who wishes to be able to rely on the committee's
opinion as demonstrating the lawyer's good faith effort to comply with these rules
has the responsibility of supplying the committee with all information material to a
determination of whether an advertisement is false or misleading.
-79-
RULE 4-7.8 LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICESEXEMPTIONS FROM
THE FILING AND REVIEW REQUIREMENT
The following are exempt from the filing requirements of rule 4-7.7:
(a) When Lawyers May Accept Referrals.  A lawyer shall not accept
referrals from a lawyer referral service unless the service:
(1) engages in no communication with the public and in no direct contact
with prospective clients in a manner that would violate the Rules of Professional
Conduct if the communication or contact were made by the lawyer;
(2) receives no fee or charge that constitutes a division or sharing of fees,
unless the service is a not-for-profit service approved by The Florida Bar pursuant
to chapter 8 of these rules;
(3) refers clients only to persons lawfully permitted to practice law in Florida
when the services to be rendered constitute the practice of law in Florida.
(4) carries or requires each lawyer participating in the service to carry
professional liability insurance in an amount not less than $100,000 per claim or
occurrence;
(5) furnishes The Florida Bar, on a quarterly basis, with the names and
Florida bar membership numbers of all  lawyers participating in the service; and
(6) neither represents nor implies to the public that the service is endorsed or
approved by The Florida Bar, unless the service is subject to chapter 8 of these
rules.Any advertisement in any of the public media, including the yellow pages of
telephone directories, that contains no illustrations and no information other than
that set forth in subdivision (c)(10) of rule 4-7.2.  This exemption extends to
television advertisements only if the visual display featured in such advertisements
is limited to the words spoken by the announcer.
(b) Definition of Lawyer Referral Service.  A "lawyer referral service"
is:A brief announcement in any of the public media that identifies a lawyer or law
firm as a contributor to a specified charity or as a sponsor of a public service
-80-
announcement or a  specified charitable, community, or public interest program,
activity, or event, provided that the announcement contains no information about
the lawyer or law firm other than name, the city where the law offices are located,
and the fact of the sponsorship or contribution.  In determining whether an
announcement is a public service announcement for purposes of this rule and
subdivision (c)(10)(I) of rule 4-7.2, the following are criteria that may be
considered:
(1)  any person, group of persons, association, organization, or entity that
receives a fee or charge for referring or causing the direct or indirect referral of a
potential client to a lawyer drawn from a specific group or panel of lawyers;
orwhether the content of the announcement appears to serve the particular interests
of the lawyer or law firm as much as or more than the interests of the public;
(2)  any group or pooled advertising program operated by any person, group
of persons, association, organization, or entity wherein the legal services
advertisements utilize a common telephone number and potential clients are then
referred only to lawyers or law firms participating in the group or pooled
advertising program;whether the announcement contains information concerning
the lawyer’s or law firm’s area of practice, legal background, or experience;
(3)  whether the announcement contains the address or telephone number of
the lawyer or law firm;
(4)  whether the announcement concerns a legal subject;
(5)  whether the announcement contains legal advice; and
(6)  whether the lawyer or law firm paid to have the announcement
published.
(c)  A listing or entry in a law list or bar publication.
(d)  A communication mailed only to existing clients, former clients, or other
lawyers.
(e)  Any written communications requested by a prospective client.
-81-
(f)  Professional announcement cards stating new or changed associations,
new offices, and similar changes relating to a lawyer or law firm, and that are
mailed only to other lawyers, relatives, close personal friends, and existing or
former clients.
(g)  Computer-accessed communications as described in subdivision (b) of
rule 4-7.6.
A pro bono referral program, in which the participating attorneys do not pay
a fee or charge of any kind to receive referrals or to belong to the referral panel,
and are undertaking the referred matters without expectation of remuneration, is not
a lawyer referral service within the definition of this rule.
Comment
Every citizen of the state should have ready access to the legal system.  A
person's access to the legal system is enhanced by the assistance of a lawyer
qualified to handle that person's legal needs.  Many of the citizens of the state who
are potential consumers of legal services encounter difficulty in identifying and
locating lawyers who are willing and qualified to consult with them about their
legal needs.  Lawyer referral services can facilitate the identification and intelligent
selection of lawyers qualified to render assistance.  However, because a potential
for abuse exists, the participation of lawyers in referral services must be regulated
to ensure protection of the public.
It is in the public interest that a person seeking the assistance of counsel
receive accurate information to select or be matched with counsel qualified to
render the needed services.  Therefore, a lawyer should not participate in a lawyer
referral service that communicates misleading information to the public or that
directly contacts prospective clients about available legal services in a manner that
constitutes impermissible solicitation.
One who avails oneself of legal services is well served only if those services
are rendered by a lawyer who exercises independent legal judgment.  The division
or sharing of a fee risks the creation of an obligation that impairs a lawyer's ability
to exercise independent legal judgment.  Therefore, the public interest usually
compels the ethical prohibition against the division or sharing of fees and that
-82-
ethical prohibition should likewise apply to the division or sharing of fees with a
lawyer referral service.  The prohibition does not extend to the lawyer's paying a
pre-arranged, fixed-sum participation fee.  Furthermore, the prohibition does not
apply when the referring agency is a not-for-profit service operated by a bona fide
state or local bar association under the supervision of and approved by The Florida
Bar in order to ensure that such service fulfills the public-interest purposes of a
lawyer referral service and to ensure that the risk of impairment of the lawyer's
ability to exercise independent legal judgment is in that circumstance minimal.
It is in the public interest that a person receive legal services only from
someone who is qualified to render them. Lawyers should strive to prevent harm
resulting from the rendering of legal services by persons not legally qualified to do
so.  Therefore, a lawyer should not participate in a lawyer referral service that
refers clients to persons not lawfully permitted to practice law in Florida when the
services to be rendered constitute the practice of law in Florida.
The quasi-institutionalization of legal services by a lawyer referral service
implies that the service has screened the qualifications and financial responsibility
of its participating lawyers.  That implication may be misleading and does not exist
when a prospective client directly selects a lawyer at arm's length.  Therefore, it is
in the public interest that only lawyers who have established a certain amount of
financial responsibility for professional liability participate in a lawyer referral
service.  Accordingly, a lawyer should participate in a lawyer referral service only
if the service requires proof of that financial responsibility.
To enable The Florida Bar to fulfill its obligation to protect the public from
unethical or other improper conduct by those who practice law in Florida, The
Florida Bar must have available to it the identity of all lawyers participating in a
lawyer referral service.  Therefore, a lawyer should participate in a lawyer referral
service only if the service furnishes The Florida Bar with the names of its
participating lawyers.
In The Florida Bar v. Doe, 634 So. 2d 160 (Fla. 1994), the court recognized
the need for specific guidelines to aid lawyers and the bar in determining whether a
particular announcement in the public media is a public service announcement as
contemplated in this rule and rule 4-7.2.  Subdivisions (b)(1)-(6) of this rule
respond to the court’s concern by setting forth criteria that, while not intended to be
-83-
exclusive, provide the needed guidance.  With the exception of subdivision (b)(3),
these criteria are based on factors considered by the court in Doe.
-84-
RULE 4-7.9  INFORMATION ABOUT A LAWYER'S SERVICES
PROVIDED UPON REQUEST
(a)  Generally.  Information provided about a lawyer's or law firm's services
upon request shall comply with the requirements of rule 4-7.2 unless otherwise
provided in this subchapter.
(b)  Request for Information by Potential Client.  Whenever a potential
client shall request information regarding a lawyer or law firm for the purpose of
making a decision regarding employment of the lawyer or law firm:
(1)  The lawyer or law firm shall promptly furnish (by mail if requested) the
written (including computer-accessed) information described in subdivision (c) of
this rule.
(2)  The lawyer or law firm may furnish such additional factual information
regarding the lawyer or law firm deemed valuable to assist the client.
(3)  If it is believed that the client is in need of services that will require that
the client read and sign a copy of the "Statement of Client's Rights" as required by
these rules, then a copy of such statement shall be furnished contemporaneously
with the above information.
(4)  If the information furnished to the client includes a fee contract, the top
of each page of the contract shall be marked "SAMPLE" in red ink in a type size
one size larger than the largest type used in the contract and the words "DO NOT
SIGN" shall appear on the client signature line.
(5)  Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision (b)(1)(B) of rule 4-7.2,
information provided to a potential client in response to a potential client's request
may contain factually verifiable statements concerning past results obtained by the
lawyer or law firm, if, either alone or in the context in which they appear, such
statements are not otherwise misleading.
(c)  Information Regarding Qualifications.  Each lawyer or law firm that
advertises the lawyer's or law firm's availability to provide legal services shall have
available in written form for delivery to any potential client:
-85-
(1)  a factual statement detailing the background, training, and experience of
each lawyer or the law firm;
(2)  if the lawyer or law firm claims special expertise in the representation of
clients in special matters or publicly limits the lawyer's or law firm's practice to
special types of cases or clients,  written information setting forth the factual details
of the lawyer's experience, expertise, background, and training in such matters.
(d)  Proof of Statements or Claims.  Upon reasonable request by The
Florida Bar, a lawyer shall promptly provide proof that any statement or claim
made in any advertisement or written communication, as well as the information
furnished to a prospective client as authorized or required by these rules, is in
compliance with rule 4-7.2.
(e)  Disclosure of Intent to Refer Matter to Another Lawyer or Law
Firm.  A statement and any information furnished to a prospective client, as
authorized by subdivision (b) of this rule, that a lawyer or law firm will represent a
client in a particular type of matter, without appropriate qualification, shall be
presumed to be misleading if the lawyer reasonably believes that a lawyer or law
firm not associated with the originally retained lawyer or law firm will be
associated or act as primary counsel in representing the client.  In determining
whether the statement is misleading in this respect, the history of prior conduct by
the lawyer in similar matters may be considered.
Comment
Consumers and potential clients often will find it useful to receive factual,
objective information from lawyers who are advertising their availability to handle
legal matters.  The rule provides that potential clients may request such information
and be given an opportunity to review that information without being required to
come to a lawyer's office to obtain it.  Selection of appropriate counsel is based
upon a number of factors.  However, selection can be enhanced by potential clients
having factual information at their disposal for review and comparison.
This rule does not require a lawyer or law firm to provide information
concerning the lawyer's or law firm's services when requested if the lawyer or law 
-86-
firm is not interested in representing the person or entity requesting the information.
-87-
RULE 4-7.10  FIRM NAMES AND LETTERHEAD
(a)  False, Misleading, or Deceptive.  A lawyer shall not use a firm name,
letterhead, or other professional designation that violates subdivision (b)(1) of rule
4-7.2.
(b) Trade Names.  A lawyer may practice under a trade name if the name is
not deceptive and does not imply a connection with a government agency or with a
public or charitable legal services organization, does not imply that the firm is
something other than a private law firm, and is not otherwise in violation of
subdivision (b)(1) of rule 4-7.2.  A lawyer in private practice may use the term
"legal clinic" or "legal services" in conjunction with the lawyer's own name if the
lawyer's practice is devoted to providing routine legal services for fees that are
lower than the prevailing rate in the community for those services.
(c) Advertising Under Trade Name.  A lawyer shall not advertise under a
trade or fictitious name, except that a lawyer who actually practices under a trade
name as authorized by subdivision (b) may use that name in advertisements.  A
lawyer who advertises under a trade or fictitious name shall be in violation of this
rule unless the same name is the law firm name that appears on the lawyer's
letterhead, business cards, office sign, and fee contracts, and appears with the
lawyer's signature on pleadings and other legal documents.
(d) Law Firm with Offices in More Than 1 Jurisdiction.  A law firm with
offices in more than 1 jurisdiction may use the same name in each jurisdiction, but
identification of the lawyers in an office of the firm shall indicate the jurisdictional
limitations on those not licensed to practice in the jurisdiction where the office is
located.
(e) Name of Public Officer in Firm Name.  The name of a lawyer holding
a public office shall not be used in the name of a law firm, or in communications on
its behalf, during any substantial period in which the lawyer is not actively and
regularly practicing with the firm.
(f) Partnerships and Authorized Business Entities.  Lawyers may state or
imply that they practice in a partnership or authorized business entity only when
that is the fact.
-88-
Comment
A firm may be designated by the names of all or some of its members, by the
names of deceased members where there has been a continuing succession in the
firm's identity, or by a trade name such as "Family Legal Clinic."  Although the
United States Supreme Court has held that legislation may prohibit the use of trade
names in professional practice, use of such names in law practice is acceptable so
long as it is not misleading.  If a private firm uses a trade name that includes a
geographical name such as "Springfield Legal Clinic," an express disclaimer that it
is a public legal aid agency may be required to avoid a misleading implication.  It
may be observed that any firm name including the name of a deceased partner is,
strictly speaking, a trade name.  The use of such names to designate law firms has
proven a useful means of identification.  However, it is misleading to use the name
of a lawyer not associated with the firm or a predecessor of the firm.
Subdivision (a) precludes use in a law firm name of terms that imply that the
firm is something other than a private law firm.  Two examples of such terms are
"academy" and "institute."   Subdivision (b) precludes use of a trade or fictitious
name suggesting that the firm is named for a person when in fact such a person
does not exist or is not associated with the firm.  An example of such an improper
name is "A. Aaron Able."  Although not prohibited per se, the terms "legal clinic"
and "legal services" would be misleading if used by a law firm that did not devote
its practice to providing routine legal services at prices below those prevailing in
the community for like services.
Subdivision (c) of this rule precludes a lawyer from advertising under a
nonsense name designed to obtain an advantageous position for the lawyer in
alphabetical directory listings unless the lawyer actually practices under that
nonsense name.  Advertising under a law firm name that differs from the firm name
under which the lawyer actually practices violates both this rule and subdivision
(b)(1) of  rule 4-7.2.
With regard to subdivision (d), lawyers sharing office facilities, but who are
not in fact partners, may not denominate themselves as, for example, "Smith and
Jones," for that title suggests partnership in the practice of law.
-89-
RULE 4-7.11  LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICES
(a)  When Lawyers May Accept Referrals.  A lawyer shall not accept
referrals from a lawyer referral service unless the service:
(1)  engages in no communication with the public and in no direct contact
with prospective clients in a manner that would violate the Rules of Professional
Conduct if the communication or contact were made by the lawyer;
(2)  receives no fee or charge that constitutes a division or sharing of fees,
unless the service is a not-for-profit service approved by The Florida Bar pursuant
to chapter 8 of these rules;
(3)  refers clients only to persons lawfully permitted to practice law in
Florida when the services to be rendered constitute the practice of law in Florida;
(4)  carries or requires each lawyer participating in the service to carry
professional liability insurance in an amount not less than $100,000 per claim or
occurrence;
(5)  furnishes The Florida Bar, on a quarterly basis, with the names and
Florida bar membership numbers of all lawyers participating in the service; and
(6) neither represents nor implies to the public that the service is endorsed or
approved by The Florida Bar, unless the service is subject to chapter 8 of these
rules.
(b)  Responsibility of Lawyer.  A lawyer who accepts referrals from a
lawyer referral service is responsible for ensuring that any advertisements or
written communications used by the service comply with the requirements of the
Rules Regulating The Florida Bar, including the provisions of this subchapter.
(c)  Definition of Lawyer Referral Service.  A "lawyer referral service" is:
(1)  any person, group of persons, association, organization, or entity that
receives a fee or charge for referring or causing the direct or indirect referral of a
potential client to a lawyer drawn from a specific group or panel of lawyers; or
-90-
(2)  any group or pooled advertising program operated by any person, group
of persons, association, organization, or entity wherein the legal services
advertisements utilize a common telephone number and potential clients are then
referred only to lawyers or law firms participating in the group or pooled
advertising program.
A pro bono referral program, in which the participating lawyers do not pay a
fee or charge of any kind to receive referrals or to belong to the referral panel, and
are undertaking the referred matters without expectation of remuneration, is not a
lawyer referral service within the definition of this rule.
Comment
Every citizen of the state should have ready access to the legal system.  A
person's access to the legal system is enhanced by the assistance of a lawyer
qualified to handle that person's legal needs.  Many of the citizens of the state who
are potential consumers of legal services encounter difficulty in identifying and
locating lawyers who are willing and qualified to consult with them about their
legal needs.  Lawyer referral services can facilitate the identification and intelligent
selection of lawyers qualified to render assistance.  However, because a potential
for abuse exists, the participation of lawyers in referral services must be regulated
to ensure protection of the public.
It is in the public interest that a person seeking the assistance of counsel
receive accurate information to select or be matched with counsel qualified to
render the needed services.  Therefore, a lawyer should not participate in a lawyer
referral service that communicates misleading information to the public or that
directly contacts prospective clients about available legal services in a manner that
constitutes impermissible solicitation.
One who avails oneself of legal services is well served only if those services
are rendered by a lawyer who exercises independent legal judgment.  The division
or sharing of a fee risks the creation of an obligation that impairs a lawyer's ability
to exercise independent legal judgment.  Therefore, the public interest usually
compels the ethical prohibition against the division or sharing of fees and that
ethical prohibition should likewise apply to the division or sharing of fees with a
lawyer referral service.  The prohibition does not extend to the lawyer's paying a
-91-
pre-arranged, fixed-sum participation fee.  Furthermore, the prohibition does not
apply when the referring agency is a not-for-profit service operated by a bona fide
state or local bar association under the supervision of and approved by The Florida
Bar in order to ensure that such service fulfills the public-interest purposes of a
lawyer referral service and to ensure that the risk of impairment of the lawyer's
ability to exercise independent legal judgment is in that circumstance minimal.
It is in the public interest that a person receive legal services only from
someone who is qualified to render them. Lawyers should strive to prevent harm
resulting from the rendering of legal services by persons not legally qualified to do
so.  Therefore, a lawyer should not participate in a lawyer referral service that
refers clients to persons not lawfully permitted to practice law in Florida when the
services to be rendered constitute the practice of law in Florida.
The quasi-institutionalization of legal services by a lawyer referral service
implies that the service has screened the qualifications and financial responsibility
of its participating lawyers.  That implication may be misleading and does not exist
when a prospective client directly selects a lawyer at arm's length.  Therefore, it is
in the public interest that only lawyers who have established a certain amount of
financial responsibility for professional liability participate in a lawyer referral
service.  Accordingly, a lawyer should participate in a lawyer referral service only
if the service requires proof of that financial responsibility.
To enable The Florida Bar to fulfill its obligation to protect the public from
unethical or other improper conduct by those who practice law in Florida, The
Florida Bar must have available to it the identity of all lawyers participating in a
lawyer referral service.  Therefore, a lawyer should participate in a lawyer referral
service only if the service furnishes The Florida Bar with the names of its
participating lawyers.
-92-
Original Proceeding - Rules Regulating The Florida Bar
Edith G. Osman, President, The Florida Bar, Miami, Florida, Howard C. Coker,
Past-president, The Florida Bar, Jacksonville, Florida, John F. Harkness, Jr.,
Executive Director, Paul F. Hill, General Counsel and Elizabeth Clark Tarbert,
Ethics Director, The Florida Bar, Tallahassee, Florida; Cynthia A. Everett, Chair,
Rules Committee, Miami, Florida; Benjamin H. Hill, III, Chair, Joint Presidential
Task Force on Advertising, Tampa, Florida; Timothy P. Chinaris, Jacksonville,
Florida; C. Rufus Pennington, III of Margol & Pennington, Jacksonville, Florida;
and Barry Richard of Greenberg, Traurig, P.A., Tallahassee, Florida, and Benjamin
H. Hill, III of Hill, Ward & Henderson, Tampa, Florida, on behalf of The Florida
Bar,
for Petitioner
Wilson Jerry Foster, Tallahassee, Florida; F. Wallace Pope, Jr. of Johnson,
Blakely, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, Clearwater, Florida, on behalf of Leonard
A. McCue & Associates d/b/a “Q Auto & Injury Attorneys”;  Mark S. Gold of
Gold & Associates, d/b/a The Ticket Clinic, Fort Lauderdale, Florida; W. F.
“Casey” Ebsary, Jr., Tampa, Florida, on behalf of Lawgroup, P.A.; H. Louis Sirkin
and Laura A. Abrams of Sirkin, Pinales, Mezibov & Schwartz, Cincinnati, Ohio, on
behalf of The Debt Relief Law Center, Feinberg, Isaak & Smith, Attoneys-at-Law; 
George K. Rahdert and Alison M. Steele of Rahdert, Anderson, McGowan &
Steele, St. Petersburg, Florida, on behalf of Nursing Home Abuse Law Center, Inc.;
C.L. Darrow, General Counsel, San Ramon, California, and Bruce S. Rogow, Fort
Lauderdale, Florida, on behalf of R. W. Lynch Co., Inc.; Howard W. Weber,
Tampa, Florida, on behalf of Government Employees Insurance Company; 
Chandler R. Finley of Finley & Associates, P.A., West Palm Beach, Florida; 
Richard N. Friedman, Miami, Florida; and David J. Kingsley of Kingsley &
Kingsley, Plantation, Florida,
Responding