New Jersey Supreme Court Officially Grants Review of Opinion 39 and Appoints a Special Master to Develop an Evidentiary RecordThe New Jersey Supreme Court officially agreed to rule on the validity of Opinion 39. Before opining about the validity of the rule, the Court appointed a retired New Jersey judge to consider any evidence presented by the parties and make factual findings. The Court presumably took this step because various parties asked the Supreme Court to consider evidence that the Committee on Attorney Advertising had not considered (since the Committee did not inform any interested parties that it was making any inquiry in the first place). Since the Supreme Court is not typically cast in the role of a factfinder, it decided to appoint a factfinder. The Court could have returned the case to the Committee to flesh out the record, but it opted, instead, to enlist former Superior Court and Appellate Division judge Robert A. Fall.
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Office of Policy Planning, Bureau of Economics, Bureau of Consumer Protection, and Bureau of Competition to submitted joint comments to the Louisiana State Bar Association (LSBA) regarding proposed revisions to the rules of professional responsibility with respect to attorney advertising. The comments express concern that "the proposed Louisiana rules would unnecessarily restrict truthful advertising by attorneys in the state."