1. 800. 973.1177
COURT REPORTER
How do you feel about Bulldogs? [James Kilpatrick] First question: How do you feel about trial lawyers? Second question: How do you feel about pit bull dogs? May the one breed lawfully adopt an image of the other?
The Supreme Court will step into this
the court unanimously rejected the referee’s
confidence in, the legal system. Were we
touchy question if it agrees to hear an
recommendation. Instead, the court found
to approve the referee’s finding, images of
appeal brought by two Fort Lauderdale
Pape and Chandler guilty of unprofessional
sharks, wolves, crocodiles and piranhas
lawyers against the Florida Bar. Some close
conduct. If that ruling is not reversed, the
could follow. This type of non-factual
questions of First Amendment law make it a
two lawyers must suffer a public reprimand
advertising cannot be permitted ...”
tough case to call.
from the bar’s Board of Governors and must
At least the facts are not in dispute. The
attend the Florida Bar Advertising Workshop.
The Florida lawyers are eloquently represented in the U.S. Supreme Court by
two lawyers are John Robert Pape and
Florida’s Chief Justice Barbara J. Pariente
professor Rodney A. Smolla of the University
Marc Andrew Chandler. Their practice goes
held that by invoking the image of a pit bull,
of Richmond School of Law. In his petition for
primarily to personal injury litigation. Three
Pape and Chandler “demean all lawyers
review he argues persuasively that lawyers
years ago they began advertising their
and thereby harm both the legal profession
should not be punished for advertising
professional services through a series of
and the public’s trust and confidence in our
“that is not false, fraudulent, deceptive, or
television commercials. The commercials
system of justice.” The image of a pit bull
misleading in any sense.” Good point. Is the
included a logo that featured an image of a
evokes an image of a lawyer who is vicious
amorphous “dignity of the profession” an
pit bull wearing a spiked collar. The firm’s
to the opposition. Some pit bulls may be
interest so overriding that it trumps a First
telephone number was displayed: 1-800-PIT-
loyal, persistent and tenacious, but these
Amendment right of commercial speech?
BULL.
charitable associations ignore “the darker
Good question.
The Florida Bar charged them with violating its rules of professional conduct. After a one-day hearing in September 2004, special master William W. Herring ruled in their favor. He found nothing unethical in a commercial that promotes lawyers as bulldogs. The breed is identified “with the qualities a consuming public would want in a trial lawyer,” e.g., that the lawyer is “aggressive, tenacious, loyal and persistent.”
side of the qualities often also associated with pit bulls: malevolence, viciousness and unpredictability.” The chief justice cited a study of fatal dog bites between 1979 and 1998. Pit bulls were charged with a third of them. She cited a string of court decisions attesting the dangerousness of the breed. She and her colleagues could not condone a TV spot
Lawyers have had a tough time of it at least since Luke wrote his gospel 2,000 years ago. “Woe unto you, lawyers!” Keats placed lawyers in “the natural history of monsters.” Daniel Defoe called them “mountebanks.” In his New Dictionary of Quotations (1942), H.L. Mencken rounded up 89 notable lines about lawyers: Only 13 citations had anything good to say about them. Unfair!
suggesting that a lawyer will get results
My own thought comes down to this: If I want
“through combative and vicious tactics that
to sue my doctor for a botched operation,
“The advertisement is tastefully done,
will maim, scar or harm the opposing party,”
give me a pit bull lawyer every time. And if I
the logo is not unduly conspicuous in its
but this is “precisely the type of unethical
learn of his services on TV, so what?
replacement of an ampersand between the
and unprofessional conduct” that is conveyed
partners’ names, and the large print 1-800
by Pape and Chandler on TV.
He added:
number is an effective mnemonic device. ... There are no slogans, jingles, alarm bells or the like, nor does the ad suggest a favorable outcome through the employment
“Indeed,” the chief justice concluded, “permitting this type of advertisement would make a mockery of our dedication to
(Letters to Mr. Kilpatrick should be sent by e-mail to kilpatjj@aol.com.) COPYRIGHT 2005 UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE
promoting public trust and confidence in our
This feature may not be reproduced or
system of justice. Prohibiting advertisements
distributed electronically, in print or otherwise
The Florida Supreme Court was not
such as the one in this case is one step we
without the written permission of uclick and
impressed by Herring’s report. In a
can take to maintain the dignity of lawyers,
Universal Press Syndicate.
remarkably stuffy opinion last November,
as well as the integrity of, and public
of improper means.”
PAGE