![]() |
||
|
Eric Turkewitz, The Turkewitz Law Firm, New York, NY |
||
Thursday, December 13, 2007Personal Injury Lawyer, Ryan Bradley, Using Blog for Blatant Solicitation I've avoided doing a post like this for many months, but figured this is the time as one lawyer seems to have stepped over a line from using his blog for commentary or even advertising and gone to outright solicitation of a particular individual.Kevin O'Keefe first reported on St. Louis attorney Ryan Bradley discussing a local accident and using the name of the injured person in the post heading, in a rather blatant hope that the injured person, family member or friend would Google the accident to see if anything was written about it, find the post, and call him. Now he has done it a second time in a week, with this post here ** There are, it seems, four types of blogs, though I am using the word "blog" very loosely here since I don't think it truly applies in either #3 or #4: 1. The pseudonymous blogger. Without a real name and contact information, the blogger writes for pure enjoyment and without any business desire. 2. Blogs that comment on the law and recent events the same way as the pseudonymous blogger, but with a name and contact information. Such a blog might have a beneficial marketing side in making the blogger more prominent in the community and be used as a form of legal networking, though I think most that stick with it do it for the pure enjoyment of writing. This is similar in concept to publishing an article in a legal trade, though it is of course much easier to do and isn't peer reviewed. This represents most of the legal blogosphere to date. 3. Blogs that are advertising. These blogs discuss some general matter of the lawyer's practice, or more likely a local accident, and then scream, "call me!" The personal injury sites have many of these, and the "call me!" works to destroy any actual content that might have been posted. 4. Outright solicitation: I don't know what the Missouri ethics rules are on solicitation, but Ryan Bradley's blog postings clearly fit into the solicitation category. He puts the name of the injured person in the heading and the body, and looked up the accident report and insurance information to post that online also. Thus, he goes beyond the mere advertising, and into outright solicitation of an individual. Even if he is ethically secure on First Amendment grounds, what he has done certainly appears scummy and is a close cousin to sending a solicitation in the mail to the house. Or picking up the phone and calling. Or sending a person to the house. Or the hospital. You know where I'm gong with this. Solicitation is but one step removed from actual ambulance chasing. I don't have the type of site that awards a "worst lawyer of the day," that is more of an Above the Law type of thing, but if I did, Bradley would surely get it. The irony in all this is that when folks now Google Ryan Bradley of Missouri in the event they do stumble over his "blog" they will also find out what other lawyers think of his solicitations. Addendum 12/17/07: Attorney Solicitation 2.0 --- Is It Ethical? ------------------------------------------------------------ ** This link is via TinyUrl, which will redirect to the blog posting, but due to the masking created by redirection, will not add any Google pagerank to the blog. More on TinyUrl at Wikipedia. Labels: Attorney Ethics, Blogging
Comments:
Aside from all that, if I was in an accident, I might not want some blogger posting it for all the world to see. It's not very nice.
Thanks for joing the discussion on this unfortunate situation Eric.
Interesting that we both held back for a bit before commenting. I was reluctant to call out a lawyer like this even though I viewed what he was doing as wrong and unprofessional. When it comes to large organizations I've not had that problem. ;) But like you, I felt I needed to take a stand and see if by bringing the issue to a head on the blogosphere, we bring a stop to it. We'll have to see if it works. If not, like you said when someone searches for Mr. Bradley as a St. Louis accident lawyer, they'll find a trail of less than favorable posts. Guess that means he's not using RSS to find out what people are saying about him.
There's a blue code of silence for cops and a white coat of silence for docs. I'd hate to see something like that for lawyers. When one screws up, all are tarnished to some degree. And there are plenty of screw-ups.
These are the fellows that make Walter and Ted look like geniuses. They also taint Kevin's efforts at legitimate marketing of lawyers through blawgs by dragging it into the gutter.
And so, we prove 2 things: (1) Lawyers can be as scummy as any other profession, but (2) at least some of us won't protect or defend the ones who embarrass the other 1%.
"I'd hate to see something like that for lawyers."
Well eric given how infrequently lawyers get sued for legal malpractice rest assured that it already exists.
Legal malpractice cases are not uncommon, and everyone I know carries professional liability coverage for it.
There is a law blog that is entirely devoted to the subject, which you can find in my blogroll, called New York Attorney Malpractice. It's coverage, however, extends well beyond New York, and there are usually several stories per day. You can also access it here: http://blog.bluestonelawfirm.com/ All that being said, legal malpractice cases are quite difficult because you not only have to prove negligence, but also must prove the underlying case to show that it would have made a difference. Thus, you have to prove two cases in one.
Thanks, Eric.
Too often I follow a link to your blog because of a disagreement the blogger had with your position. Today I was reminded that although lawyers like your subject exist, you and the vast majority of your profession know them for what they are as well, and don't condone their behavior. I'm sorry it didn't occur to me earlier. Thanks for being out there.
Well, , he calls it a blog and it has dated periodic entries, so it meets part of the definition. It does not, however, allow for comments.
Certainly, Eric is familiar with New York Lawyer's Code of Professional Responsibility
EC 1-7, which states, "A lawyer should avoid bias and condescension toward, and treat with dignity and respect, all parties, witnesses, lawyers, court employees, and other persons involved in the legal process." Certainly.
Yes, I do agree with those rules about treating the legal process with dignity. And when I see someone so grossly violate it, I will speak up.
So you admit you knowingly violate the rules of New York ethics by posting this editorial/libelous attack?
There is nothing that I wrote that violates any NY ethics rule nor anything that is even remotely libelous.
I have pointed out the offending conduct, first identified by another, and noted both in this post and the follow-up post that there are repercussions for people who violate the norms of society. You can read more about that in the follow-up post here: Attorney Solicitation 2.0 --- Is It Ethical? Or you can read more about it in Dan Solove's book that I just reviewed: Book Review: Dan Solove's The Future of Reputation On the Internet
I challenge you to explain HOW it does not violate EC 1-7.
I have a suspicion the New York Bar Association will think differently, but we will have to wait and see. Really, you seem to be the unethical one here. Re-read your post and the ethics rule posted above. As for libel, perhaps there will be repercussions for you in "violating the norms of society".
There is nothing I can do about someone making a frivolous complaint of the type you have threatened. But the effects of making one can be significant because the blogosphere isn't kind to that type of conduct. It results in the original malfeasance, Bradley's use of his blog for apparent solicitation, being repeated over and over as the issue is analyzed.
Post a Comment
For more info, see: The Streisand Effect Links to this post: << Home
The New York Personal Injury Law Blog does not accept advertising banners, pop up ads or other distractions from its content. But since The Turkewitz Law Firm is the sole sponsor, it may be considered a form of attorney advertising in accordance with New York rules going into effect February 1, 2007 (22 NYCRR 1200.1, et. seq.) Throughout the blog as it develops, you may see examples of cases we have handled, or cases from others, that are used for illustrative purposes. Since all cases are different, and legal authority may change from year to year, it is important to remember that prior results in any particular case do not guarantee or predict similar outcomes with respect to any future matter, including yours, in which any lawyer or law firm may be retained. Some of the commentary may be become outdated. Some might be a minority opinion, or simply wrong. No reader should consider this site (or any other) to be authoritative, and if a legal issue is presented, the reader should contact an attorney of his or her own choosing for advice. Finally, we are not responsible for the comments of others that may be added to this site.
|
Subscribe by EmailAbout the authorEric Turkewitz has litigated New York personal injury and medical malpractice cases for 20 years, and is the founder of The Turkewitz Law Firm in New York. His firm's website is at www.TurkewitzLaw.com. View by Label
Welcome New Visitors
|
|
|
Copyright © 2007 Eric Turkewitz & The Turkewitz Law Firm |
||
|
About the New York Personal Injury Law Blog: |
||
|
|
Design by Lidija Tomas Design / Studio 4D |