Arent Fox’s Bernice Leber Discusses Attorney Advertising with Bloomberg BNA’s US Law Week

    March 15, 2012

    Arent Fox’s Bernice Leber, a partner in the firm’s litigation practice in New York, was interviewed by Bloomberg BNA’s US Law Week for a March 13 article analyzing a recent federal appeals court ruling on the constitutionality of a New York rule of professional conduct that regulates attorney advertising content.

    In an article titled “Disclaimer Attorneys Must Use in New York to Advertise Specialty Mostly Unconstitutional,” US Law Week reports:

    A New York rule of professional conduct requiring specified disclaimers on attorney advertising that touts the attorney as a specialist in a particular area of law runs afoul of the First Amendment, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled March 5 (Hayes v. State of New York Attorney Grievance Committee of the Eighth Judicial District, 2d Cir., No. 10-1587-cv, 3/5/12). …

    Bernice Leber, Arent Fox, New York, who is a past president of the New York State Bar Association, chaired the NYSBA’s task force on lawyer advertising, and argued for the NYSBA as amicus curiae in another lawyer advertising case, Alexander v. Cahill, 598 F.3d 79, 78 USLW 1567 (2d Cir. 2010), told Bloomberg BNA March 8 that ‘‘the decision is fairly limited to its facts.’’ She explained that in the past, controversy swirled around ‘‘attorney advertising on billboards around the State and no more so than in Buffalo,’’ where Hayes practices. She said that the court was concerned ‘‘about the manner in which the Grievance Committee has issued guidelines in its interpretation of Rule 7.4.’’ Moreover, she noted that ‘‘(s)ubstantially half the opinion is directed to the application of the Rule to this attorney’s billboard placement and stationery.’’

    Even so, Leber pointed out that New York’s certification requirement was adopted in 1999, and 32 other states have it, ‘‘so it withstood scrutiny on the appellate level until now.’’ She said, ‘‘The fact that the two disclaimer portions of Rule 7.4 were found vague … will have direct impact on those attorneys who heretofore have had similar constraints on their advertising, not only in New York but in the other affected states.’’

    To read the article in its entirety, please click here.