Opinion ID: 2103926
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Second Petition

Text: The Board filed a Supplemental Petition for Discipline on July 21, 1997. The supplemental petition alleged that a complaint file had been opened pertaining to two advertisements placed in The Chattanooga Times on February 9, 1997: one in the Chattanooga TV Guide and one in the Business Directory Section of the classified ads. The TV guide ad stated: DIVORCE, BOTH PARTIES SIGN, $90.00 + COURT COSTS $89.50, No `Extra' Charges, TED WALKER, [phone number], Not certified as a specialist by the TN Commission on Certification and Specialization. The ad in the Business Directory Section was similar but did not contain the not certified statement. The Board's supplemental petition alleged that the ad in the Chattanooga TV Guide did not use the precise language required by the Tennessee Supreme Court in quotation marks within Tenn. R.S.Ct. 8, DR 2-101(C)(2)(3), with no variations or abbreviations, an interpretation adopted by the Board in Tennessee Formal Ethics Opinion 95-F-137. The supplemental petition also alleged that the advertisement in the Business Directory Section include[d] no mandatory disclosure of specialty certification whatsoever, as is required under DR 2-101(C)(3). The petition further alleged that Walker did not comply with DR 2-101(F) (pertaining to filing copies of advertisements within three days of their publication) as to either of the ads.