Attorney Advertising and the Law
Prior to a 1977 Federal Court ruling removing the strict regulations on attorney advertising you didn’t see television commercials promising exorbitant “rewards” for injuries sustained in motor vehicle accidents or due to side effects of prescription drugs, etc. In the decision rendered in Bates v State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977), it was determined that advertising speech was protected by the First Amendment thereby opening the door for marketing of legal services in the public media.
Since the unshackling of attorney advertising limitations there have developed different schools of thought on the subject. Some attorneys advertise full force with beautiful, healthy looking people describing their huge settlements and implying that you too could receive one of these windfalls, albeit with a small disclaimer at the bottom of the screen indicating that each case is evaluated on its own merits.
Others advertise on a smaller scale and in a low key manner. Still others believe that advertising does not present the proper image of their purpose.
Steve Briley and Harold White are among this latter group.
They believe that attorneys who continue to put their clients first in providing the best assistance and legal protection possible, experience personal and professional fulfillment which does not have a price tag. Believing that if you pursue excellence in your service to people the material rewards will follow, the only places you will see information on those services provided by Banner, Briley & White will be on their Web site and in the telephone directory.
Attorney advertising is regulated by the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct. For more information on those rules — please visit the State Bar of Texas' official Web site.
