Search for: "Bates v. State Bar of Arizona"
Results 21 - 40
of 65
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Jul 2010, 7:50 am
It's almost taking law firm marketing back to the Stone Age—or at least pre Bates v State Bar of Arizona (1977). [read post]
11 Oct 2015, 9:01 pm
State Bar of Arizona. [read post]
24 Jul 2012, 2:00 pm
Moreover, the decision in Bates v. [read post]
12 Nov 2015, 6:43 pm
State Bar of Arizona). [read post]
12 Nov 2015, 6:43 pm
State Bar of Arizona). [read post]
24 Apr 2008, 10:32 pm
State Bar of Arizona 97 S.Ct. 2691 [1977]) this becomes just one more waste of taxpayers money. [read post]
21 Nov 2006, 11:25 am
I am opposed to the proposed rules on three grounds -- a misunderstanding of the concept of ethics (see Bates et. al. v State Bar of Arizona); the rules themselves will not likely be upheld at the first legal challenge to them; and there is clearly a misunderstanding of the meaning of marketing for lawyers and the long-term effects of Bates in serving both law firms and, most significantly, clients. [read post]
6 Dec 2009, 3:19 pm
State Bar of Arizona ruling that the First Amendment allows lawyer advertising, most state bars banned lawyer advertising as undignified and misleading to consumers. [read post]
31 Jan 2021, 7:14 am
State Bar of Arizona finding that bar association rules banning or strictly limiting lawyer advertising violated the First Amendment’s guaranty of free speech. [read post]
8 Dec 2007, 4:40 pm
Arizona State Bar. [read post]
19 Sep 2011, 9:40 am
In Bates v. [read post]
9 Nov 2011, 9:15 pm
Thanks to Arizona’s overreaching, “Bates v. [read post]
29 Oct 2010, 9:30 am
State Bar of Arizona, 443 U.S. 350 (1977).The comment period is open until December 15, 2010. [read post]
12 Nov 2010, 1:54 pm
State Bar of Arizona 433 U. [read post]
17 Jan 2013, 3:06 pm
Seemed innocent enough, however it turns out it wasn't, at least if you were to ask the Arizona State Bar about 30 years ago. [read post]
23 Mar 2018, 4:16 am
Arizona, a cert petition challenging Arizona’s death-penalty scheme and the death penalty nationwide, noting that in a statement respecting denial, four justices suggested “that the state’s capital sentencing scheme may be unconstitutional because it does not adequately restrict who is eligible for the death penalty. [read post]
24 Nov 2010, 10:12 am
State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977). [read post]
24 Nov 2010, 10:12 am
State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977). [read post]
12 Nov 2015, 6:43 pm
State Bar of Arizona). [read post]
11 May 2008, 1:14 pm
Arizona State Bar we didn't have any lawyer marketing or advertising. [read post]
