BAR REPORT - Capitol Report
NJSBA seeks review of ethics opinion on competitor keyword purchases
February 17, 2020 at 08:00 AM
3 minute read
NJSBA urges review of ethics opinion regarding competitor keyword purchases
The New Jersey State Bar Association (NJSBA) joined the Bergen County Bar Association in urging the Supreme Court's Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics to review Opinion 735. The opinion found no issue with an attorney purchasing a competitor attorney's name as a keyword in an internet search to ostensibly redirect a consumer to the purchasing lawyer's website. The finding is one of four ethics opinions issued nationally that addresses the issue—Texas and Wisconsin found no issue with the practice; North Carolina found the practice unethical. The NJSBA filed a petition, authored by Bonnie C. Frost, for review of ACPE Opinion 735.
"The NJSBA is concerned that this conclusion condones gamesmanship over professionalism where, if an attorney has enough money to spend on advertising, an attorney can use a competitor's name to redirect a consumer to that attorney's website instead of the site the consumer originally intended," said the NJSBA in its brief.
The submission highlighted concerns about the basis for the underlying opinion, which may have been based on inaccurate presumptions that a website of the keyword purchaser's law firm and the purchaser's law firm would both appear in the resulting search. "This may not always be the case," pointed out the NJSBA.
Ultimately, the NJSBA challenged the opinion as too narrow, urging further analysis on the question based on misleading communications pursuant to RPC 7.2(a) and misleading the public in violation of RPC 8.4(c). "Because the conclusion in Opinion 735 relies on various assumptions that may or may not be accurate, the NJSBA contends that the inquiry requires additional study and broader input," said the NJSBA.
The issue is ripe for review, noted the NJSBA, given the evolving technology of internet search campaigns. In its brief, the association demonstrated how difficult it is to identify paid advertising versus the organic listing by referencing an article analyzing Google's new search results, which appear to have little visual distinction between advertisements and search results. "Under these circumstances, it becomes more imperative that the Supreme Court consider the issues the NJSBA and the Bergen County Bar Association raise in their petitions for review of ACPE 735, and allow for greater discussion and debate by the entire bar," said the NJSBA.
This is a status report provided by the New Jersey State Bar Association on recently passed and pending legislation, regulations, gubernatorial nominations and/or appointments of interest to lawyers, as well as the involvement of the NJSBA as amicus in appellate court matters. To learn more, visit njsba.com.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSend Us Your New Partners for the NJ Law Journal's New Partners Yearbook
1 minute readNew Methods for Clients and Families to Have Their Estate and Legacy Planning Complete
5 minute readTensions Run High at Final Hearing Before Manhattan Congestion Pricing Takes Effect
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'It's Not Going to Be Pretty': PayPal, Capital One Face Novel Class Actions Over 'Poaching' Commissions Owed Influencers
- 211th Circuit Rejects Trump's Emergency Request as DOJ Prepares to Release Special Counsel's Final Report
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 4'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 5Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250