Document: 455 U.S. 191 102 S.Ct. 929 71 L.Ed.2d 64 In re R. M. J., Appellant. No. 80-1431. Argued Nov. 9, 1981. Decided Jan. 25, 1982. Syllabus Rule 4 of the Missouri Supreme Court, regulating advertising by lawyers, states that a lawyer may include 10 categories information in published advertisement: name, address and telephone number; areas practice; date place birth; schools attended; foreign language ability; office hours; fee for an initial consultation; availability schedule fees; credit arrangements; fixed to be charged certain "routine" legal services. Although does not state explicitly these are only will permitted, is interpretation given State Court appellee Advisory Committee, which with its enforcement. An addendum specifies two ways practice listed advertisement, under one use or more list 23 but deviate from precise wording stated describe areas. addition, permits send professional announcement cards announcing change firm similar matters, "lawyers, clients, former personal friends, relatives." was filed charging appellant, practicing St. Louis, Mo., violations 4. The appellant advertisements other than specified courts admitted although this included among authorized Rule. had mailed persons those permitted Appellant claimed each restrictions upon unconstitutional First Fourteenth Amendments, upheld constitutionality issued private reprimand. Held: None question appellant's Amendment rights can sustained circumstances case. Pp. 199-207. (a) States retain ability regulate commercial speech, such as advertising, inherently misleading has proved practice, Amendments require they do so care manner no extensive reasonably necessary further substantial interests. 199-204. (b) Because listing appellant—e.g., "real estate" instead "property law" 4, "contracts" "securities," were Rule's listing—has been shown misleading, suggests interest promoted restriction, portion specifying invalid restriction speech applied advertisements. P. 205. (c) Nor identified any prohibiting identifying jurisdictions he licensed practice. Such on face. That both Illinois factual highly relevant information, particularly light geography region practices. While relatively uninformative fact member United Bar could there finding effect nothing record indicate it specifically identify potentially misleading. 205-206. (d) With respect cards, while mailings difficult supervise, indication inability supervise reason restricts potential audience cards. clear absolute prohibition solution, failed effort proceed along less restrictive path. 206. 609 S.W.2d 411, reversed. Charles B. Blackmar, appellant. John W. Inglish, California, appellee. Justice POWELL delivered opinion Court. 1 Court's decision Bates v. Arizona, 433 350, 97 2691, 53 810 (1977), required re-examination long-held perceptions "advertising" lawyers. This appeal presents whether aspects revised ethical rules conform requirements Bates. 2 * As many States, until Bates, placed lawyers.1 After invalidation just Committee Professional Ethics Responsibility court's advertising. sought "strike midpoint between unlimited advertising,"2 regulation adopted slight modification represents compromise. Lawyer restricted some instances, language. 3 Thus, part B DR2-101 "publish . newspapers, periodicals yellow pages directories" information: services.3 indicated forms printed advertisement means permitted,4 Committee5 addition guidelines, authority Rule, providing if chooses his must prescribed ways. He three general descriptive terms Rule—"General Civil Practice," "General Criminal Practice." Alternatively, including, example, "Tort Law," "Family "Probate Trust Law." term specific subheadings, nor "limited" particular disclaimer certification expertise following practice.6 5 Finally, aspect DR2-102 regulates It mail dignified "brief card stating new changed associates addresses, matters." however, permit mailing; sent relatives."7 Mo.Rev.Stat., Sup.Ct. DR2-102(A)(2) (1978) (Index Vol.). II 6 graduated law school 1973 Bars same year. short stint Securities Exchange Commission Washington, D.C., moved April 1977, began sole practitioner. opening office, selected addressees. order reach wider audience, several local newspapers directory. 7 at issue litigation appeared January, February, August 1978, expressly They Illinois. contained, large capital letters, statement "Admitted Practice Before THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT." And deviated Committee—e.g., "personal injury" "tort law"—and without analogue prepared "contract," "zoning & land use," "communication," "pension profit sharing plans."8 See n.6, supra. exception appearing after 8 On November 19, 1979, unprofessional conduct. publishing approved and, case advertisements, certification. also sending "persons relatives" violation DR2-102(A)(2). response, argued that, requirement, Amendments. 9 disbarment proceeding, 411 (1981). But court did explain reasons decision, found have violated charges lodged against him them. Indeed, purported uphold DR2-101; mention propriety DR2-102, governs Writing separate dissenting opinions, Chief Bardgett Judge Seiler should dismissed. dissenters suggested significant either requiring certain, words informing public would mailing sort unethical.9 III 11 considered extension protection announced Virginia Pharmacy Board Citizens Consumer Council, 425 748, 96 1817, 48 346 (1976), lawyers.10 held indeed form protected Amendment, "advertising attorneys subjected blanket suppression." U.S., 383, S.Ct., 2708. 12 More specifically, lawyers advertise fees charge concluded price "inherently" therefore prohibited basis. rejected number justifications broad including adverse professionalism, administration justice, cost quality services, well difficulties enforcing standards outright prohibition. interests sufficiently strong affected justify 13 nevertheless narrow one. emphasized still regulated.11 False, deceptive, remains subject restraint,12 recognized professions poses special risks deception—"because lacks sophistication concerning misstatements might overlooked deemed unimportant quite inappropriate advertising." Id., 2708 (footnote omitted). claims in-person solicitation likely mislead warrant restriction. noted warning appropriately required, even context price, dissipate possibility consumer confusion deception.13 "[T]he bar retains power correct omissions presenting inaccurate picture, [although] preferred remedy disclosure, rather less." 375, 2704.14 14 short, persuaded services necessarily receptive restricting foreclose demonstrably possibilities deception presented public's comparative lack knowledge, limited police themselves, absence standardization "product" renders especially susceptible abuses legitimate controlling. 15 made subsequent cases regulation—and imposition discipline—are permissible where deceive indicates method deceptive. Ohralik Ohio Assn., 436 447, 462, 98 1912, 1921, 56 444 (1978), "fraud, undue influence, intimidation, overreaching, 'vexatious conduct' " solicitation, prohibited. Friedman Rogers, 440 1, 99 887, 59 100 (1979), we Texas prohibit trade names optometrists, view considerable history abuse worked consuming through names. Commercial doctrine, summarized generally follows: Truthful related lawful activities entitled protections Amendment. when content experience abuse, impose appropriate restrictions. Misleading entirely. types e.g., way first instance preferably requirement disclaimers explanation. 2704. broader prevent deception. 16 Even communication regulate. assert interference proportion served. Central Hudson Gas ELectric Corp. Public Service Comm'n, 447 557, 563-564, 2343, 2350, 65 341 (1980).15 Restrictions narrowly drawn, lawfully extent furthers State's interest. professionalism great speech.16 368-372, 375-377, 2704-2705. IV 17 We now turn apply generalizations case.17 18 four kinds 4: provided failing disclaimer, makes challenge requirement,18 pass remaining infractions. 19 [8] reprimanded deviating argue "property" scarcely public. Similarly, Committee's form, apparent danger explained dissent, respects informative addendum. because conclude 20 rule prohibits Missouri. practiced. 21 Somewhat troubling listing, States. Appendix opinion. emphasis least bad taste. unfamiliar admission Yet There inclusion or, limitation type size explaining nature Bar. 22 friends Mailings handbills newspapers. again deal silent record. solution. For filing copy all mailings, able exercise reasonable supervision over mailings.19 path.20 Electric 566, 2351 ("we determine serve" governmental asserted). sum, none say sufficed cure possible emphasize, throughout opinion, support carefully drawn meet requirements. 24 Accordingly, judgment Reversed. THT APPENDIX TO OPINION OF COURT 25 above January/February 1978 West End Word basis Count I Information. J , R M 26 Corporate Personal Injury 27 Partnership Trials Appeals 28 Real Estate Securities-Bonds 29 Tax Wills, Estate-Planning 30 Bankruptcy Pension- 31 Probate Profit-Sharing 32 Contracts Workman's 33 Anti-Trust Compensation 34 Labor Divorce, Separation 35 Custody, Adoption Admitted To Restore Licensed In: MISSOURI ILLINOIS 36 120 § Central--------------------------721-5321 37 Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. directory Louis Suburban February Prior 1977 revision, pertinent part: "(A) A shall prepare, cause prepared, use, participate of, contains professionally self-laudatory statements calculated attract lay clients; used herein, 'public communication' includes, to, television, radio, motion newspaper, magazine, book. "(B) publicize himself, partner, associate newspaper magazine radio television announcements, display city directories, publicity, authorize others behalf ." Mo.Sup.Ct.Rules Ann., DR2-101, p. 63 (Vernon 1981) (historical note). Report (Sept. 1977), reprinted App. A-30. are: uncontested dissolution marriage; adoption; bankruptcy; uncomplicated name; simple warranty quitclaim deed; deed trust; promissory note; individual federal income tax return; attorney; will. DR2-101(B) authorizes approve additions routine Ibid. face, appear suggest provisions intended provide safe harbor, information. impression conveyed DR2-101(A): "A not, affiliated firm, respecting containing false, fraudulent, unfair claim." DR2-101(A). standing committee responsible prosecuting disciplinary proceedings giving formal informal opinions Canons Responsibility. 5. promulgated fields advertised hereinafter set out: 1. 'General Practice' 2. 3. Practice.' "If uses above, area If used, then following: 'Administrative Law' 'Anti-Trust 'Appellate 'Bankruptcy' 'Commercial 6. 'Corporation Law Business Organizations' 7. 'Criminal 8. 'Eminent Domain 9. 'Environmental 10. 'Family 11. 'Financial Institution 12. 'Insurance 13. 'International 14. 'Labor 15. 'Local Government 16. 'Military 17. 'Probate 18. 'Property 19. 'Public Utility 20. 'Taxation 21. 'Tort 22. 'Trial 23. 'Workers Law.' No deviation phraseology stated. .: 'Listing therein.' Addendum (Adv.Comm. 13, 1977). provision altered amendments. typical Four conformed Rule—"bankruptcy," "anti-trust," "labor," "criminal." Eleven "tax," "corporate," "partnership," estate," "probate," "wills, estate planning," injury," "trials appeals," "workmen's compensation," "divorce-separation," "custody-adoption," respectively, "taxation law," "corporation business organizations," "probate trust "trial practice," "appellate "workers compensation "family law." Eight addendum: "aviation," "securities-bonds," plans," "entertainment/sports," "food, drug cosmetic," "communication." photograph West, Directory reproduced membership conspicuously letters. judges differed respects. before improper; helpful. Moreover, penalized having omitted available too late add disclaimer. Bardgett's dissent omits failure n.18, infra. expressed belief our (1980), entirety take opposite position. Both reflect thoughtful examination Pharmacy, reserved question: "We stress pharmacists. express professions, distinctions, historical functional, consideration different factors. Physicians dispense standardized products; render almost infinite variety nature, consequent enhanced undertake 773, n. 1831, 25. permissible. "define package. 373, 28, 2703, explanations avoid false hopes, id., 384, 2709 ("[S]ome supplementation, like, kind ruled today assure misled"). Presumably, too, designate "routine." misled insufficient deception, matter come entirely posture. doctrine itself based empirical assumptions benefits proves into account. Cf. 372, 2703 ("We restrained misleading"). 11, 895, (1979) ("When dealing frame decisions narrowly, 'allowing modes [of speech] impermissible realm noncommercial expression' (quoting 456, 1918, (1978)); 771-772, 24, 1830-1831 ("Untruthful otherwise, never own sake. Obviously, much provably wholly deceptive foresee obstacle effectively problem. construe today, insuring stream flow cleanly freely") (citations footnote time, place, permissible, "the problems electronic broadcast media consideration." 2709. Model Rules Conduct proposed American Association Evaluation Standards "a media, directory, periodical, written involving contact." 7.2(a). 7.1 terms: make about lawyer's it: "(a) material misrepresentation law, whole materially misleading; "(b) create unjustified expectation results achieve, implies achieve violate law; "(c) compares lawyers' unless comparison factually substantiated." Commentary "advertisements obtained client, amount damage award obtaining favorable verdicts, client endorsements." understood format House Delegates 1982 midyear meeting substance annual meeting. We, course, imply proposals. 2351: "In cases, then, four-part analysis developed. At outset, expression within provision, concern activity Next, ask asserted substantial. inquiries yield positive answers, directly advances asserted, serve interest." discussion text indicates, formulation understanding characteristics afford opportunities confuse present products offered n.10, recognize, guidance courts. represent principles distilled developing law. case-by-case basis—as Part opinion—more available. note imposed "expression solely economic speaker audience." supra, 561, 2348. By describing qualifications, purpose encourage members engage profit. oral argument counsel "[t]he action disclaimer." Tr. Oral Arg. Although, every him, implication read detailed opinions. 7.2(b) requires "[a] recording kept year dissemination." argues "frightening" unaccustomed receiving letters offices. likely, stamp "This Advertisement" envelope. Consolidated Edison 530, 541-542, 2326, 2335, 319 (1980) (billing insert intrusion privacy, privacy prohibition).

Category: 5