Document: 496 U.S. 91 110 S.Ct. 2281 L.Ed.2d 83 Gary E. PEEL, Petitioner,v.ATTORNEY REGISTRATION AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION OF ILLINOIS. No. 88-1775. Argued Jan. 17, 1990. Decided June 4, Syllabus Petitioner Peel is licensed to practice law in Illinois and other States. He also has a "Certificate Civil Trial Advocacy" from the National Board of Advocacy (NBTA), which offers periodic certification applicants who meet exacting standards experience competence trial work. The Administrator respondent Attorney Registration Disciplinary Commission filed complaint alleging that Peel, by using professional letterhead stated his name, followed indented notation "Certified Specialist By [NBTA]" unindented "Licensed: Illinois, Missouri, Arizona," was, inter alia, holding himself out as certified legal specialist violation Rule 2-105(a)(3) Code Professional Responsibility. recommended censure. State Supreme Court adopted Commission's recommendation, concluding First Amendment did not protect because public could confuse NBTA sources license certification, be read claim superior quality. Held: judgment reversed, case remanded. 126 Ill.2d 397, 128 Ill.Dec. 535, 534 N.E.2d 980 (1989), reversed 1 Justice STEVENS, joined BRENNAN, BLACKMUN, KENNEDY, concluded lawyer constitutional right, under applicable commercial speech, advertise or her NBTA. Pp. 99-111. 2 (a) Truthful advertising related lawful activities entitled protections. Although may prohibit misleading entirely, it place an absolute prohibition on potentially information if presented way deceptive. In re R.M.J., 455 191, 102 929, 71 64. P. 2287. 3 (b) Peel's actually inherently misleading. facts are true verifiable, there been no finding actual deception misunderstanding. state court's focus implied "claim" "quality" services confuses distinction between statements opinion quality objective support inference Even well known, evidence consumers, such those States with plans, misled they do inform themselves precise certification. There finding, basis for belief, representation generally would associated governmental action. understands licenses issued authorities many certificates private organizations, unlikely necessarily "specialist" national organization formal recognition. Moreover, have evaluated lawyers' advertisements certifications were protected Amendment. 100-106. 4 (c) State's interest avoiding any potential might mislead insufficient justify categorical ban their use; nor does Court's inherent authority supervise its own bar insulate this review infirmity. need complete prophylactic rule against specialty undermined fact same risk posed specified designations—for "Registered Patent Attorney" "Proctor Admiralty"—that permitted 2-105(a). Such facilitates consumer's access better serves administration justice. To extent consider screening certifying organizations requiring disclaimer about specialty. 106-111. 5 MARSHALL, agreeing neither misleading, thus enact regulations than total ensure representations. NBTA's name give impression nonlawyers federal government agency; juxtaposition references lead individuals believe somehow sanctioned States; reference cause people think attorneys without opinions when adequate information. A require provide additional order prevent being require, example, include stating affiliated Federal Government, requirements so inferences drawn consumers attorney's qualifications based more knowledge meaning Each decide itself, within constraints, how best claims 111-117. 6 J., announced delivered opinion, JJ., joined. concurring judgment, joined, post, p. 111. WHITE, dissenting 118. O'CONNOR, REHNQUIST, C.J., SCALIA, 119. 7 Bruce J. Ennis, Jr., Washington, D.C., petitioner. 8 Stephen Marzen, Trading Com'n, amicus curiae, supporting petitioner special leave Court. 9 William F. Moran, III, respondent. 10 STEVENS KENNEDY join. 11 publicly censured states he civil Advocacy. We granted certiorari whether statement 492 917, 109 3240, 106 588 (1989).1 12 * This comes us background growing programs. 1973 Sonnett Memorial Lecture, then Chief Warren Burger advanced proposition specialized training advocates essential American system justice.2 That was endorsed number groups lawyers3 instrumental establishing (NBTA) 1977. 13 Since then, developed set procedures lawyers Those standards, approved board judges, scholars, practitioners, demanding. They counsel both jury nonjury trials, participation programs continuing education, demonstration writing skills, successful completion day-long examination. Certification expires five years unless again demonstrates qualification.4 14 described "highly-structured" "arduous process employs wide range assessment methods." Task Force Lawyer Competence, Report With Findings Recommendations Conference Justices, Publication NCSC-021, pp. 33-34 (May 26, 1982). After reviewing procedures, Minnesota found "NBTA applies rigorous examinations scale before specialist." Johnson, 341 N.W.2d 282, 283 (1983). Alabama similarly "a indicate level expertise regard advocacy excess required admission generally." Ex parte Howell, 487 So.2d 848, 851 (1986). II 15 practices Edwardsville, Illinois. 1968, Arizona 1979, Missouri 1981. served president Madison County Bar Association active association work.5 tried verdict over 100 trials 300 participated hundreds litigated matters settled. 1981, renewed 1986, listed him 1985 Directory Specialists Members."6 16 1983 petitioner's contained referring three licensed. It appears follows: 17 "Gary 18 19 "By 20 Arizona."7 21 1987, (Commission) petitioner, use letterhead, provides: 22 "A firm specify designate area field partners concentrates limits practice. Except forth 2-105(a), hold 'certified' 'specialist.' "8 23 alleged violations 2-101(b), requires lawyer's "communication shall contain all necessary make communication false otherwise operate deceive," 1-102(a)(1), subjects discipline Rules 1-102(a)(1) (1988). 24 hearing, censure 2-105(a)(3). rejected form speech " 'subjected blanket suppression.' Hearing Panel, App. C Pet. Cert. 19a. "Findings Facts" deceptive, "Conclusion Law" ended brief 25 "by out, 'Gary Certified Specialist—By Advocacy,' direct above cited [2-105(a)(3) ]. 26 "We 'misleading' our never recognized process." Id., at 20a. 27 recommendation held ways. First, "certified" "licensed" "could" general into belief derived solely impinged exclusive failed distinguish voluntary unofficial group licensure official organization. 405-406, 538-539, 980, 983-984 (1989). 28 Second, court characterized "misleading tacitly attests [petitioner] advocate." 406, Ill.Dec., 539, N.E.2d, 984. noted confusion parties' descriptions requirements,9 but constituted reliable, verifiable advocate. Rather, reasoned tantamount superiority therefore warranted restriction decision 64 (1982). Ill.2d, 29 Finally, term incorrectly had formally authorized specialists advocacy. conjunction former product latter. 410, 541, 986. Concluding these reasons, upheld 2-105(a) III 30 considered governed "constitutional limitations regulation advertising." 402, 538, 982. only record correspondence itself. contends that, absent propose transactions clients, should accorded full protections noncommercial speech. However, acknowledges "this can decided narrower ground even cannot categorically prohibited." Tr. Oral Arg. 9. agree question 31 Bates v. Arizona, 433 350, 97 2691, 53 810 (1977), protection Powell summarized unanimous U.S., 203, S.Ct., 937: 32 "Truthful But particular content method suggests proved subject abuse, impose appropriate restrictions. Misleading prohibited entirely. certain types information, e.g., listing areas practice, . 33 "Even retains some regulate. must assert substantial interference proportion served." (Emphasis added.) 34 we and, not, character creates sufficiently use. 35 verifiable. undisputed law. contention client person deceived stationery. Neither made factual misunderstanding, rather concluded, matter law, program. Notably, although originally charged aims attorney, violate rule. 36 evaluating focused facial accuracy, "as [petitioner's] services," qualitative 'might likely warrant restriction.' 540, 984 (quoting 201, 936). analysis fact, predicate Measures hours like what schools attended activities, unverifiable ultimate work promise success, cf. n. 14, 936, simply albeit one multiple predicates, consumer draw given practice.10 37 assume will infer exceed bar. Thus inquiry fitness, indiscriminately price, statement, true, case, greater degree qualification reasonably inferred evaluation requirements. Much trademark, strength measured stands. merely notes explanation See 9, supra. find objectively clear, event, see why uncertainty identified consumer. plans expressly authorize certification,11 allowed. 38 Nor somewhat contradictory fears identification conveys, hand, grant other, separate two plain texts: begins verb "[c]ertified" identifies source "National Advocacy," while second "[l]icensed" licensure. further distinguished below uses margin name. supra, 96. action—state federal—and construed. 39 satisfied consuming licenses—to drive cars, radio stations, sell liquor host certificates—to commend job performance, convey educational degree, commemorate solo flight hole one—are organizations. dictionary definition "certificate," quoted excerpts, comports common understanding: 40 "[A] document school, agency, satisfactorily completed course studies, passed qualifying examination, attained standing officially position field." Webster's Third New International Dictionary 367 (1986 ed.) (emphasis added portions omitted 405, 984). 41 relied cramped "specialist," turning Webster's—which contains suggestion approval "specialists"—to Association's Comment Model 7.4, prohibits implying except designations patent, admiralty, state-designated specialties. concludes terms "specialty" "have acquired secondary recognition therefore, misleading" procedures. ABA Conduct 7.4 appreciate difficulties evolving attorney present ABA.12 seems petitioner'sstate ment confused Trade Commission, long history deceptive advertising, fortifies conclusion observation "one readily numerous specialty—from 'air conditioning specialist' realm home repairs 'foreign car automotive repairs—that cast doubt notion automatically mistake specialization State." Brief Amicus Curiae 24. 42 reject paternalistic assumption recipients discriminating audience children's television. Cf. Bolger Youngs Drug Products Corp., 463 60, 74, 103 2875, 2884, 77 469 (1983).13 courts face, recent decisions, 848 (Ala.1986); 282 (Minn.1983). Given absence IV 43 defends Illinois' assertion view, possibility communications outweighs cost providing relevant specialists. Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. Public Service Comm'n York, 447 557, 566, 2343, 2351, 65 (1980). 44 "certification" though truthful, understood fully readers. pose "Practice before: United Court," (1982),14 exploiting targeted letter, Shapero Kentucky Assn., 486 466, 108 1916, 475 (1988), confusing reader accurate illustration, Zauderer Office Counsel Ohio, 471 626, 105 2265, 85 652 (1985). those, conclude restricting 'broader the' perceived evil." Shapero, 472, 1921 937). Ohralik Ohio 436 447, 98 1912, 56 444 (1978) (restricting in-person solicitation).15 titles Admiralty," 2-105(a)'s exceptions, produces deception. 45 Lacking empirical deception, relies heavily O'CONNOR's dissent urges "we deferential" State, asserting "the far determine mislead."16 Whether places beyond Members exercise de novo review. Bose Consumers Union States, Inc., 466 485, 498-511, 104 1949, 1958-1965, 80 502 (1984). exercising actions See, Baird 401 1, 702, 639 (1971). constrained Constitution, specifically principle disclosure positive contribution decisionmaking concealment Virginia Pharmacy Bd. Citizens Consumer Council, 425 748, 770, 96 1817, 1829, 48 346 (1976); YCentral 562, 2349. satisfy heavy burden justifying dissemination public. 937. 46 presumption favoring fortified members respected profession engage deceive clients clients. As 379, 2706: 47 "It least incongruous opponents extol virtues altruism point, another, seize opportunity distort." ignore unscrupulous qualified stand behind truthful "XYZ Board" "specialist admiralty law" sham. advertises certification" demonstrate available consistently applied showing—indeed suggestion—that distinguishing boards bona fide bogus significant, associations disciplinary committees police effectively. 477, 1923 ("The furnishes scrutiny solicitation letters appreciably burdensome less reliable advertisements"). 49 "If naivete bar's role assure populace informed enable proper perspective." Bates, 375, 2705. 201-203, 936-938.17 however, completely N.W.2d, (striking down prevented 'a until adopts authorizes rules permitting so' "). Information specialties justice.18 50 Petitioner's dispute fides relevance concern hypothetical cases sufficient rebut concealment. Disclosure encourages development utilization meritorious attorneys. violating violates Amendment, remanded proceedings inconsistent opinion. 51 ordered. 52 whom BRENNAN joins, judgment. I concur plurality's (NBTA). believe, though, Accordingly, Because unconstitutional proceedings. 54 scope permissible depends nature question. 937, crafted nonmisleading manner. Ibid. 55 plurality Ante, 105-106. recipient stationery statement. banned outright. imparted conducive coercion. (1978), pecuniary gain "is overreaching forms misconduct." 464, 1923. raise concerns face-to-face barratry letter badgering advocate breathing neck" take time reflect provided him. 475-476, 1922-1923, suggested devoid intrinsic especially historically used 202, 937 (citing Friedman Rogers, 440 99 887, 59 (1979), trade names optometrists). fit category, impart showing similar deceive. including letterhead. nonetheless create misimpression agency Government. most undoubtedly know Government regulate lawyers, probably not; thus, word "National" dispel implication agency. Furthermore, phrase Arizona" NBTA, 123 (O'CONNOR, dissenting). 57 founded understand authorities, whereas 103-104. "certificate" often connoting authorization: 58 (emphases added). ibid. (defining "certify" as, "license"). Indeed, interpretation accords States' specialists, 124 dissenting), professionals. For instance, prescribe for, accountants Accountants." Ill.Rev.Stat., ch. 111, ¶ 5500.01 et seq. (1987 Supp.1988). Webster's, "certified accountant" "an accountant usu[ally] met certificate"). explanation, placed proximity 652, 2282, (1985) (holding advertisement promising "if recovery, fees owed clients" "members unaware technical meanings 'fees' 'costs'—terms ordinary usage, virtually interchangeable"). 60 addition, "advertising susceptible measurement verification; accordingly, restriction." Ariz., 383-384, 2708-2709, (1977). discounts asserts facts. 101. draws justified, ibid., apparently believes anyone passes 'rigorous exacting' possesses exceptional qualifications, ante, 95 (Minn.1983)). Whereas "bogus" "objective argues, 109, "greater requirements," 102. 61 characteristics buttress Facts if, suggests, NBTA-certified highly average still different it. think, Specialist" means unusually high success rate trials. Alternatively, specialist, every certified. inference, needless say, true. 62 misunderstanding commonly understanding evidence, or, importantly, widely known. 63 examined R.M.J. There, disciplined among things, "Admitted Practice Before THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT." 197, 934. relatively uninformative unfamiliar Court." 205, 938. unconstitutional, part misleading; attempted restrictive preventing "requir[ing] explaining Bar." 206, 939. Nevertheless, acknowledgment instructive. measures confusion. may, "some limited supplementation, warning like, misled." 384, 2709. Accord, ("[T]he remedy first instance preferably requirement disclaimers explanation"). decisions helpful guidance area. soliciting business sending personalized known face problems. 476, said could, bear label identifying informing report inaccurate letter. 477-478, 1923-1924. Zauderer, newspaper containing advice illustrations show combat abuses short ban. 644, 648-649, 2278, 2280-2281. contingent-fee disclose pay costs lawsuits unsuccessful erroneously owe money lost cases. 650-653, 2281-2283. Following logic cases, claiming misleading.1 might, with, by, offered course, constraints misleading.2 66 dissenting. 67 MARSHALL reasons gives conclusion. Thus, four Justices—Justice Justices joining opinion—who protects forbid circulation. unprotected: CHIEF JUSTICE, SCALIA hence uphold Responsibility; us—Justice myself—find permit letterheads accompanied avoid danger. carry disclaimer. upshot apply flat attorneys, particularly carrying disclaimers, allowed leads me affirm, reverse, below. 68 reverse free circulate indeed, not—but refuse enforce applied, leaving powerless act drafts survive nothing brand overbreadth, doctrine little considering validity restrictions involved case. 380-381, 2707-2708, "established nonapplicability overbreadth speech." Trustees University N.Y. Fox, 469, 483, 3028, 3036, 388 (1989); 478, 1924, (1988); 463, 20, 1922, (1978). so, issue here invalid constitutionally circulation form. enough qualify it, clean up eliminate mislead. Until does, legally bars circulating 69 affirm 70 JUSTICE join, provides yet another example raised rote application context Nothing prior mandates strike here, designed ethical profession. Failure accord considerable latitude embroils micromanagement borders. 72 argues reach 99-100. "decide issues decisions." Cardinale Louisiana, 394 437, 438, 89 1161, 1162, 398 (1969). 73 recently (1985): 74 "The false, [99 100] (1979). Commercial unlawful restricted service interest, through directly advance interest." 638, 2275. 75 my standard Responsibility valid measure control public's comparative lack knowledge, ability professions themselves, standardization 'product' renders [attorney speech] legitimate controlling." valuable public, broad 76 "has clear regulation—and imposition discipline—are where indicates deceptive." correctly shown 100-101, fails adequately address "inherently concluded. 408, 985 Charged duty monitoring final arbiters deferential statements. alone At District Columbia currently Alaska Prof.Resp. DR 2-105 (1990); D.C.Ct.Rules, App.A., Haw.Code Ill.Code Ind.Rule Prof.Conduct Iowa Ky.Sup.Ct. (1990-1991); Md.Rule Mass.Sup.Judicial Ct.Rule Miss.Rule Mo.Sup.Ct.Rule Nev.Sup.Ct.Rule 198 Ore.Code Pa.Rule S.D.Rule Tenn.Sup.Ct.Rule (1988-1989); Va.Sup.Ct.Rules, pt. 6, § 2, 2-104 Wash.Rule W.Va.Rule Wis.Sup.Ct.Rule 20:7.4 Despite veracity "[a] fact." 101 (citation omitted). conflates verifiability. Merely something 383, 2709, (1977) (attorney "that restraint" added)). "comparative knowledge" affairs able assess advertising. understandable services. 78 verifies assembled 984, underlying And reveals attempt verify "could misleading," 205-206, 938-939, named recognizable institution location inquiries addressed. Reference "NBTA" guidepost inquiries. is, justified banning 79 abandoned altogether Apparently, "demonstrate law." 109. thereby deserted sole policy reason justifies headlong plunge rules—facilitation "consumer's services." 110. Facilitation hardly achieved knows criteria membership. 81 "[A]dvertising 2708-2709; 936 ("[C]laims restriction"). properly citation others' supports intended attest refers Competence 1982), stated: Advocacy, program achievement advocacy, highly-structured addition examination select members." 82 Not lacking purported superiority. increases likelihood reasoned, easily profession, disposes difficulty drawing unconvincing licensing certification: organizations." 103. Yet, bright line exists. California now Cal. Ct., Policies Governing Program Certifying Legal (1990). Ariz. Prof. ER Ark. 7.4(c) Fla. 4-7.5(c) La.Rev.Stat.Ann., N.J.Ct.Rule 1:39 N.J.Rule N.M.Rules Law, 16-704 N.C.Ann.Rules, Plan Specialization, H, 5.7 S.C.Rules Advertising, Ct. (Supp.1989); Tex. Rules, Art. 10, 2-101(C) Utah 7.4(b) claim. "[B]ecause lacks sophistication concerning leeway untruthful expression contexts force arena." err ("Misleading entirely"). suggest regulating case-by-case determination. Under theory, individual hearing each extending resourceful lawyer. establish onerous permits claims. 84 majority agree, 111 (MARSHALL, J.); 118 (WHITE, dissenting); 121-124 dissenting, J.), If regulated prohibition. difficult fashioned, 110; 117, communicate pieces space along (1) higher certified; (2) sanctioned; (3) either reasonable are. adequately, cured forced fashion claimed borders, least, screen Ala.Code Prof.Resp.Temp. 2-112 (1989) (providing organizations). having Constitution go extremes citizens experiment allow serve goal assisting obtaining Equal Protection Clause rational justification allowing specialization, precluding concentration permit, irrational reporting attach noted, encountered 410-411, Locating poses obstacle. Clause. 86 foregoing part: "Congress abridging freedom press. ." censored censorship Cantwell Connecticut, 310 296, 900, L.Ed. 1213 (1940); Near ex rel. Olson, 697, 625, 1357 (1931). Burger, Special Skills Advocacy: Are Specialized Training Advocates Essential Our System Justice? Ford.L.Rev. 227 (1973) (recording Fourth Annual John Lecture November 1973). warned qualified, "simply virtue bar, serious consequence." 240. Other proponents stress creation powerful economic incentive increase [lawyers'] competence." Academy Lawyers 15. Specialty: Final Earl (sponsored Roscoe Pound-American Foundation) (1976). sponsoring Attorneys Association, America, Lawyers, Society Barristers, Criminal Defense Women Liability Attorneys. 9-13. current applicant: member good standing; misconduct criminal convictions discipline; during period immediately preceding certification; (4) involvement 30% litigation application; (5) appearing days contested involving taking testimony; (6) participate education (7) confidentially reviewed six applicant matter, judge appeared years; (8) memorandum submitted (9) pass written testing procedural substantive various vice chair Insurance Tort Committee General Session officer Tri-City Association. America. Tr., G 28a-29a. 19a; 22-23. D 21a. exceptions lawyers. remainder "Rule 2-105. Limitation Practice. "(a) "(1) admitted Trademark designation 'Patents,' 'Patent Attorney,' Lawyer,' 'Registered Attorney' combination terms, office sign. "(2) engaged trademark 'Trademarks,' 'Trademark 'Admiralty,' 'Proctor Admiralty' 'Admiralty 2-101 2-104." 406-407, 539-540, 984-985. ambiguity inconsistency experience: carried verdict, America major jury. fail newly revised amici, whose varied other's terminology. 23, 26. All parties Of publicize others credential. unqualified. negative certifies comprehensive program, Ariz.Rule Cal.Rule Conn.Rule 7.4A-C Fla.Rule Regulating 6-4 Ga.Rules Ct.Ann., 2-105(3) Minn.Rule Minn.State 5, N.M. Specialization 19-101 App.H S.C.Sup.Ct.Rule Tex.State 2-101(C), branches medicine, handled Medical Specialties, residency, evaluations. Evaluation Procedures: Developing Research Agenda, Proceedings 7-11 (1981). requirements, nevertheless "come regarded skill proficiency [have] issued." Evaluating (J. Lloyd D. Langsley eds. 1983). Prior revision 1989, to," "concentrated in," When proposed 1983, amendments drop argued narrow 'specialist' does. perceive probate ABA, Legislative History 189 (1987). amendments' undermine essentially conceded recognition," develop came being. 7.4's exception "Patent Admiralty" ignores asserted terms. imbues historical, formal, recognition, despite prerequisites use: "Recognition patent long-established Office. Designation historical tradition maritime commerce courts." Court, rests flexible appraisal emphasizes "public's "sophistication 120, 124, simultaneously "common profession" specific 124. These Attorney," interpreting acceptable "reporting experience," latter "claim quality." Post, 126. prefer consumer, what, any, value reasoning contact really Bar, 122, misses point. Both facts, them. falls Amendment's banned, bad taste" 938-939. noteworthy WHITE's doctrine, 118-119, allows party conduct challenge overbroad impact Peel. WHITE analysis. 121. abdication radical disparities State. On finds "properly [that] mislead." 123. analysis, fall outside protection; forbids entity. 121 (listing certification). O'CONNOR defer contrary judgments bars, (Minn.1983), permissible, see, certify). here—as R.M.J.—to prohibition, minimize misunderstand significance 2293, preclude 376, 2705, principal consult assist them Staff Improving Access Services: Case Removing Restrictions Advertising extend convenience seek 126, specializing needed "case-by-case review" unduly 125. contrary, setting accompany charge enforcing investigate adjudicate regulations, just agencies existing rules. No required. primary task burdens speaker's rights, respect rights 2297 regulation, guess comply regulation. amount misunderstandings here. poles spectrum clear. exhaustive, detailed recounting suffice misled. 663-664, 2288-2289, (BRENNAN, part, part) ("[C]ompelling publication fee fill itself chill entirely deception").

Category: 5