Legal Opinion
Alexander v. Cahill
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided March 12, 2010No. Docket 07-3677-cv (L), 07-3900-cv (XAP)PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CALABRESI, Circuit Judge:
New York’s Appellate Division adopted new rules prohibiting certain types of attorney advertising and solicitation, which were to take effect February 1, 2007. The new rules barred, inter alia, testimonials from clients relating to pending matters, portrayals of judges or fictitious law firms, attention-getting techniques unrelated to attorney competence, and trade names or nicknames that imply an ability to get results. The amendments also established a thirty-day moratorium for targeted solicitation following a specific incident, including targeted ads on television…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Southeastern Promotions, Ltd. v. ConradSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Board of Trustees of State Univ. of NY v. FoxSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Windsor v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2012
- Centro De La Comunidad Hispana De Locust Valley v. Town of Oyster BayCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2017
- Heffner v. MurphyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2014
- 1-800-411-Pain Referral v. Richard Tollefson, D.C.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2014
- Public Citizen, Inc. v. Louisiana Attorney Disciplinary BoardCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2011
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.