SUPREME COURT OF WISCONSIN
In the
Matter of the Amendment of
Supreme
Court Rules: SCR 20:7.4 -- ORDER
Lawyers’
Communication of Fields of No. 96-07
Practice
On September 11,
1996, the court held a public hearing on the petition filed by the Board of
Governors of the State Bar of Wisconsin and the Board of Attorneys Professional
Responsibility seeking the amendment of SCR 20:7.4 to authorize a lawyer to
communicate the fact that the lawyer has been certified as a specialist in a
field of law by a named organization or authority approved by the American Bar
Association to grant certification, subject to the American Bar Association’s
standards and criteria for accreditation of specialty programs. The petition also sought corresponding
amendment of the Comment to SCR 20:7.4.
The court has considered the petition, the presentations at the public
hearing and the material submitted to the court in connection with the
proposal.
IT IS ORDERED
that, effective the date of this order, Supreme Court Rule 20:7.4 and Comment
are amended to read:
SCR
20:7.4 Communication of fields of
practice
A lawyer may
communicate the fact that the lawyer does or does not practice in particular
fields of law. A lawyer shall not state
or imply that the lawyer is a “specialist”, “certified”, or words of
similar import except as follows:
(a) a A
lawyer admitted to engage in patent practice before the United States Patent
and Trademark Office may use the designation “patent attorney” or a
substantially similar designation; and.
(b) a A
lawyer engaged in admiralty practice may use the designation “admiralty,”,
“proctor in admiralty” or a substantially similar designation.
(c) A lawyer
may communicate the fact that he or she has been certified as a specialist in a
field of law by a named organization or authority but only if that
certification is granted by an organization or authority whose specialty
certification program is accredited by the American Bar Association.
COMMENT:
This rule permits a lawyer to indicate areas of practice in
communications about the lawyer’s services; for example, in a telephone
directory or other advertising. If a
lawyer practices only in certain fields, or will not accept matters except in
such fields, the lawyer is permitted so to indicate. However, stating that the lawyer is a “specialist” or that the
lawyer’s practice “is limited to” or “concentrated in” particular fields is not
permitted. These terms have acquired a
secondary meaning implying formal recognition as a specialist. Hence, use of these terms may be misleading
unless the lawyer is certified or recognized in accordance with procedures in
the state where the lawyer is licensed to practice. All communications are, however, subject
to the “false and misleading” standard of SCR 20:7.1 in respect to
communications concerning a lawyer’s services.
A lawyer may not communicate that the lawyer is a
specialist or has been recognized or certified as a specialist in a particular
field of law, except as provided by this rule.
Recognition of specialization in patent matters is a matter of long
established policy of the Patent and Trademark Office, as reflected in
paragraph (a). Paragraph (b) recognizes
that the Designation designation of admiralty practice has a
long historical tradition associated with maritime commerce and the federal
courts.
Paragraph (c) permits a lawyer to communicate that the
lawyer has been certified as a specialist in a field of law when the American
Bar Association has accredited the organization’s specialty program to grant
such certification. Certification
procedures imply that an objective entity has recognized a lawyer’s higher
degree of specialized ability than is suggested by general licensure to
practice law. Those objective entities
may be expected to apply standards of competence, experience and knowledge to
insure that a lawyer’s recognition as a specialist is meaningful and
reliable. In order to insure that
consumers can obtain access to useful certification, the name of the certifying
organization or agency must be included in any communication regarding the
certification.
See, Peel v. Attorney Registration and Disciplinary
Commission of Illinois, 496 U.S. 91, 110 S.Ct. 2281, 110 L.Ed.2d 83 (1990).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that notice
of this amendment of the Supreme Court Rules shall be given by a single publication
of a copy of this order in the official state newspaper and in an official
publication of the State Bar of Wisconsin.
Dated at Madison, Wisconsin, this
28th day of October, 1996.
BY THE COURT:
________________________
Marilyn L. Graves, Clerk
GESKE, J., did not participate.