'Divorce' billboard removed

[pgwenthold]

Regardless of it encouraging, or not encouraging divorce, I think it very tacky, and not appropriate for "Members of the bar".

I don't necessarily disagree, but is it any less appropriate than those ads by lawfirms looking to sue for you?

"Have you ever taken phenphen?"
"We sue drunk drivers."
(that's a roadside ad near here)


And then there are the commercials by the ambulance chasers.

I don't see why these are acceptable, but divorce is not.

 

[WildCat]

I'm not even a lawyer and I can figure out that the first thing I would do on getting that excuse would be to demand the public records of all billboards within a one-mile radius of the offending one, showing they all had proper permits.

Oh, that won't matter. Having dealt with the city for many years, I can guarantee you the reply will be "we only respond to complaints". It's the same phenomena I see almost daily when a rear porch will get written up for something minor, like a rail 1" shorter than city code mandates, while the one next door teeters on the verge of total collapse and gets no violation.

 

[strathmeyer]

What does this mean for my "don't get married" billboards for my dating service?

 

[NobbyNobbs]

This billboard is a reflection of our times. The simple fact is that there are a lot of men* who think that they can do better than their current spouse,



*z (women too, but I think this ad was aimed at men)

I haven't seen the billboard in question, only read the OP's description, but what about it leads you to think it was aimed at men?

And even if it were, wouldn't any one divorce necessarily require two lawyers, one of them being for the woman?

 

[Snide]

Good points!

And I hope the bar exam goes well!

If KingMerv sues me, maybe you can help me out!

Thanks...but you'll have to wait. If I take the bar, it won't be until next Feb.

 

[Snide]

I don't necessarily disagree, but is it any less appropriate than those ads by lawfirms looking to sue for you?

"Have you ever taken phenphen?"
"We sue drunk drivers."
(that's a roadside ad near here)


And then there are the commercials by the ambulance chasers.

I don't see why these are acceptable, but divorce is not.

Bar associations differ from state to state on advertising ethics. As do opinions. I wouldn't assume This Guy finds those other types of ads any more aceceptable than this one. Except maybe the phen fen one...that seems fine to me.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

"They ripped our billboard down without due process," Fetman said. "We own that art. I feel violated."

Is there a class in law school where they teach them to say things like this with a straight face?

 

[strathmeyer]

Well, lawyers do have a special place in their hearts for due process.

 

[This Guy]

I don't necessarily disagree, but is it any less appropriate than those ads by lawfirms looking to sue for you?

"Have you ever taken phenphen?"
"We sue drunk drivers."
(that's a roadside ad near here)


And then there are the commercials by the ambulance chasers.

I don't see why these are acceptable, but divorce is not.

Please see my first paragraph in reply #13.

I find those just as tacky and inappropriate. But that is an opinion

 

[Beerina]

It didn't have the proper permit.

One needs a permit to practice free speech on an otherwise fine and already-existing billboard?

Some politicians need to go to jail. But I'm not one of those who believe in vox populi vox dei as justification for crypto-censorship, among anything and everything else.

It wasn't the mayor, it was some aldermen. The guy in women's underwear was the late Mayor Harold Washington. IIRC, the artist (David Nelson, a student at the Art Institute of Chicago) did sue. He got the painting back (though it was damaged), and $95,000 in attorney fees.

Sweet. Too bad the alderman and others weren't jailed for abuse of power in a free society.

 

[Michael Redman]

It is unethical to take divorce cases on contingency because (as I understand it) it is presumed that this would put the attorney in conflict with the public policy goal of encouraging reconciliation or amicable dissolution, which may be more in the clients' interest than how much cash they can carry out of the battle.

The reason this is different than advertising for injury victims, malpractice victims, etc., is that in those cases, the damage has been already been done, and the question is simply where the financial loss should fall.

I wouldn't be surprised if the bar found this ad unethical for encouraging people to divorce. (however, the firm may have been required to get prior approval of the ad from the bar before it went up, as is the case in many situations.) Anyway, this wasn't a disciplinary action by the bar, it was governmental censorship.

 

[Darth Rotor]

I don't necessarily disagree, but is it any less appropriate than those ads by lawfirms looking to sue for you?

"Have you ever taken phenphen?"
"We sue drunk drivers."
(that's a roadside ad near here)


And then there are the commercials by the ambulance chasers.

I don't see why these are acceptable, but divorce is not.

I'll sugest that both sets of ads are unethical. That concern does not seem to have stopped the legal profession, writ large, in recent memory, since money talks.

Jack Thompson, anyone?

DR

 

[Mojo]

The city of Chicago has taken down a racy billboard that proclaimed "Life is short. Get a divorce."

There was a similar campaign run in London a few years back. The posters were put in the toilets of pubs, with different versions for the Gents' and the Ladies'.

There was a complaint to the ASA about the "Gents'" version, but it was dismissed.