in re R. M. J. (455 U.S. 191)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided January 25, 1982 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 455 U.S. 191 · 102 S. Ct. 929
- Decided
- January 25, 1982
- Term
- October Term 1981
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Powell
- Issue area
- Attorneys
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
- Constitutional ruling
- State/territorial law held unconstitutional
Opinion excerpt
Justice Powell delivered the opinion of the Court. The Court’s decision in Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U. S. 350 (1977), required a re-examination of long-held perceptions as to “advertising” by lawyers. This appeal presents the question whether certain aspects of the revised ethical rules of the Supreme Court of Missouri regulating lawyer advertising conform to the requirements of Bates. I As with many of the States, until the decision in Bates, Missouri placed an absolute prohibition on advertising by lawyers. After the Court’s invalidation of just such a prohibition in Bates, the Committee on Professional Ethics and Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Missouri revised that court’s Rule 4 regulating lawyer advertising. The Committee sought to “strike a midpoint between prohibition and unlimited advertising,” and the revised regulation of advertising, adopted with slight modification by the State Supreme Court, represents a compromise. Lawyer advertising is permitted, but it is restricted to certain categories of information, and in some instances, to certain specified language. Thus, part B of DR 2-101 of the Rule states that a lawyer may “publish ... in newspapers, periodicals and the yellow pages of telephone directories” 10 categories of information: name, address and telephone number: areas of practice; date and place of birth; schools attended; foreign…
Excerpt of a 32,247-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.