Court Opinion

ID: 9933406
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-09 18:41:59.164256+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:17:48.167478
License: Public Domain

I recognize that the majority's opinion here is probably consistent with the law relating to attorney advertising, as declared by the Supreme Court of the United States in Bates v.State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350, 97 S.Ct. 2691,53 L.Ed.2d 810 (1977), and in subsequent cases. However, the lawyer-advertising landscape has radically changed since Bates
was decided, and I note that the United States Supreme Court has recently granted certiorari review in the case of TheFlorida Bar v. McHenry, ___ U.S. ___, 115 S.Ct. 42,129 L.Ed.2d 937 (1994), in which the Florida Bar is asking the Supreme Court to give it greater latitude in regulating lawyer advertising.
I believe that the United States Supreme Court, in the Florida case, intends to reexamine the issue of acceptable guidelines for attorneys who wish to advertise and that it may modify the law relating to what a State Bar can and cannot do in regulating lawyer advertising. I would not decide this case until the Florida case has been decided by the United States Supreme Court; consequently, I must disagree with the Court's decision to release the case. *Page 986