The Florida Bar must really want to muzzle the 800 pit bull ads that it helped make famous
– a Florida giant in the field of appellate law — to pursue its crusade against the purportedly
deceptive and undignified lawyer advertising. Richard is a partner at the Tallahassee firm of
Greenburg Traurig, and is perhaps best known for his nationally televised argument on behalf
of President Bush before the Florda Supreme Court in the Election 2000 Bush-Gore litigation.
As we explained more fully here:
The Honorable Judge William W. Herring presided over the matter as Referee
and ruled that neither the 1 (800) PITBULL number, nor P&C’s logo (depicting
the head of a pit bull in a spiked collar) are deceptive or otherwise violative of
the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar; furthermore, the State’s lawyer advertising
rules are unconstitutional restrictions on commercial speech as applied here by
The Florida Bar.
We think this case will backfire on the censors at the Florida Bar — we put our money on Pape
& Chandler and the First Amendment.
update (8 PM): Tim Chinaris of sunEthics has written to remind us that Barry Richard un-
Steven G. Mason used an ad that stated “AV rated, the Highest Rating [in the] Martindale-
Hubbell National Legal Directory.” FBA said the ad violated an ethical rule prohibiting
“self-laudatory” advertising, and insisted Mason include a disclaimer that Martindale-
Hubbell does not rate all lawyers and that the ratings are exclusively based upon information
from confidential sources. (see 1st Amendment Law Center for a good summary of Mason)
After losing at the 11th Circuit, Richard is quoted saying, “I admit that this case was at the
edge of the envelope.” This time, the Florida Bar has again gone over the edge.
spring breeze–
two samurai
attend the dog
after plastering
the gate with fleas
the dog runs off
the dog
braces himself…
snowball!
ISSA, translated by David G. Lanoue
The Florida Bar must really want to muzzle the 800 pit bull ads that it helped make famous
– a Florida giant in the field of appellate law — to pursue its crusade against the purportedly
deceptive and undignified lawyer advertising. Richard is a partner at the Tallahassee firm of
Greenburg Traurig, and is perhaps best known for his nationally televised argument on behalf
of President Bush before the Florda Supreme Court in the Election 2000 Bush-Gore litigation.
As we explained more fully here:
The Honorable Judge William W. Herring presided over the matter as Referee
and ruled that neither the 1 (800) PITBULL number, nor P&C’s logo (depicting
the head of a pit bull in a spiked collar) are deceptive or otherwise violative of
the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar; furthermore, the State’s lawyer advertising
rules are unconstitutional restrictions on commercial speech as applied here by
The Florida Bar.
We think this case will backfire on the censors at the Florida Bar — we put our money on Pape
& Chandler and the First Amendment.
update (8 PM): Tim Chinaris of sunEthics has written to remind us that Barry Richard un-
Steven G. Mason used an ad that stated “AV rated, the Highest Rating [in the] Martindale-
Hubbell National Legal Directory.” FBA said the ad violated an ethical rule prohibiting
“self-laudatory” advertising, and insisted Mason include a disclaimer that Martindale-
Hubbell does not rate all lawyers and that the ratings are exclusively based upon information
from confidential sources. (see 1st Amendment Law Center for a good summary of Mason)
After losing at the 11th Circuit, Richard is quoted saying, “I admit that this case was at the
edge of the envelope.” This time, the Florida Bar has again gone over the edge.
spring breeze–
two samurai
attend the dog
after plastering
the gate with fleas
the dog runs off
the dog
braces himself…
snowball!
ISSA, translated by David G. Lanoue
autumn clothesline
his and her pyjamas
frozen together
calmly talking divorce
underfoot the crackle
of fallen leaves
having to guess
from the footsteps:
evening fog
eyelid lightshow –
he hits the snooze button
one more time
[Dec. 10, 2004]
one-breath pundit
Poor Walter Olson, people keep mistaking the Editor of Overlawyered.com
for a lawyer, and now LegalAffairs has him listed among the candidates in
be the first to tell you that not being a lawyer may be one of the best ways
to be one of “the country’s most influential and important legal thinkers—
the ones whose ideas are pushing the law forward (or backward, as the case
may be).” You have until March 1, 2005 to submit your six choices.
Eugene Volokh routinely directs at their Bushism of the Day column?” We ask:
Why should they have to? Anyone who reads Slate’s Bushism series knows
why they do it. Point-by-point refutation (often overkilling the topic and audience
to the point of mental numbness) is not going to change even one mind. It must
instead make the average reader say “I get it, I get it, I get it already, Eugene!”
autumn clothesline
his and her pyjamas
frozen together
calmly talking divorce
underfoot the crackle
of fallen leaves
having to guess
from the footsteps:
evening fog
eyelid lightshow –
he hits the snooze button
one more time
[Dec. 10, 2004]
one-breath pundit
Poor Walter Olson, people keep mistaking the Editor of Overlawyered.com
for a lawyer, and now LegalAffairs has him listed among the candidates in
be the first to tell you that not being a lawyer may be one of the best ways
to be one of “the country’s most influential and important legal thinkers—
the ones whose ideas are pushing the law forward (or backward, as the case
may be).” You have until March 1, 2005 to submit your six choices.
Eugene Volokh routinely directs at their Bushism of the Day column?” We ask:
Why should they have to? Anyone who reads Slate’s Bushism series knows
why they do it. Point-by-point refutation (often overkilling the topic and audience
to the point of mental numbness) is not going to change even one mind. It must
instead make the average reader say “I get it, I get it, I get it already, Eugene!”
may improve your understanding of policy issues involving markets, competition, and corporate structure
Foer sets up the review with this introduction:
“Markets and governments have been with us throughout history, but our notions of how these two
featured instruments of civilization should interact are constantly changing. Five recent books throw
light on current thinking about the nature of firms and markets and the appropriate role for government,
particularly with respect to government’s paradoxical antitrust role as the middle way protector of
competition, the principal alternative to a heavy-handed regime of economic regulation or its opposite,
laissez faire capitalism. The microeconomic paradigm known as the Chicago School (or what Joseph
Stiglitz in the international context calls “the Washington Consensus”) has controlled federal antitrust
policy since the election of Ronald Reagan. The paradigm is flawed, but its successor has not yet
congealed.”
at the market
with all his might
firefly flits
ISSA, translated by D. Lanoue 
may improve your understanding of policy issues involving markets, competition, and corporate structure
Foer sets up the review with this introduction:
“Markets and governments have been with us throughout history, but our notions of how these two
featured instruments of civilization should interact are constantly changing. Five recent books throw
light on current thinking about the nature of firms and markets and the appropriate role for government,
particularly with respect to government’s paradoxical antitrust role as the middle way protector of
competition, the principal alternative to a heavy-handed regime of economic regulation or its opposite,
laissez faire capitalism. The microeconomic paradigm known as the Chicago School (or what Joseph
Stiglitz in the international context calls “the Washington Consensus”) has controlled federal antitrust
policy since the election of Ronald Reagan. The paradigm is flawed, but its successor has not yet
congealed.”
at the market
with all his might
firefly flits
ISSA, translated by D. Lanoue
