By Erinn Connor

Staff Writer

There’s something missing from the billboards along Interstate-81 and the commercials that run on local Syracuse television stations.

The law firm Alexander & Catalano, popularly known as the ‘heavy hitters,’ was restricted by new state laws from using nicknames or having lawyers pose in non-legal situations in advertisements. The laws went into effect Feb. 1.

James Alexander filed a lawsuit in federal court, citing the law is unconstitutional and against free speech. Alexander and Catalano were not able to comment on the case because they already filed the lawsuit and are prevented by law from further comment.

‘I think the law was a reaction after many years of flamboyant advertising from lawyers,’ said Steven Wechsler, a professor at the Syracuse University College of Law. ‘Some lawyers find it distasteful to advertise on TV or in an undignified way, and these laws are an attempt to rein it in.’

The New York state laws caused Alexander & Catalano to drop its nickname and take down billboards that portray the lawyers wearing boxing gloves or appearing like giants next to buildings. Their TV commercials were also affected, as some show the lawyers running so fast to clients’ houses they appear as blurs.

‘As long as the ads aren’t directly or purposefully misleading, I think they’re OK,’ said Hallie Stiller, a sophomore magazine journalism major. ‘I’ve seen worse advertising.’

The lawsuit filed by Alexander & Catalano states ‘the amendments appear to be motivated solely by a general distaste for certain forms of lawyer advertising.’ It goes on to cite discrimination against pro bono lawyers.

Since lawyer ethics come from the courts that created the new laws, nicknames and posing on billboards were considered ethical. Just two months ago, the only law regarding lawyer advertising said the ads could not be false or misleading.

‘I wouldn’t be surprised if this case goes to the U.S. Supreme Court,’ Wechsler said. ‘Personally I think there’s a good chance that the laws will be upheld. But we could be surprised, and the laws will be thrown out. It’s really a toss up.’

Roy Gutterman, a communications law professor at the S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications said lawyer advertising raises the public’s expectations of what lawyers can do for them, and if the ads don’t live up to the services, they are illegal.

Whether or not the nickname, ‘heavy hitters,’ or the lawyers posing as giants will be proven misleading remains to be seen. First Amendment rights and fair speech are at the heart of the case for both sides.

The constitutionality of the law is at the center of the lawsuit filed by Alexander & Catalano. The lawsuit also says the new laws will hurt the company’s business, and they received fewer than 10 complaints about advertising in the past 10 years.

‘The whole point of ads is to have a slogan and to get people to remember your product,’ said Na’Tasha Simmons, a sophomore psychology major. ‘The laws defeat the purpose of the ads. I think it’s a disadvantage to Alexander & Catalano; they’re being censored unfairly.’

While the law may appear as a clear violation of the First Amendment, there may be more to the new laws and lawsuit than meets the eye. The U.S. Supreme Court has never directly addressed television advertising since the first lawyer advertising case 30 years ago, Wechsler said.

While the commercials may be annoying to television viewers who get the jingles stuck in their heads, the verdict could end up being a major decision on free speech and the restriction of advertising.

‘I think the bar is afraid that the ads reduce the image of lawyers and make them look unprofessional,’ said Pat Longstaff, a television, radio and film professor in Newhouse. ‘But on the other hand, the ads say what they do. They have client testimonials saying this, too.’

While the law appears to be a precaution against lawyer advertising becoming too extreme, it is hard to say if the ‘heavy hitters’ will be appearing on Syracuse billboards and televisions anytime soon. The case has yet to be heard, and it is unclear which side will prevail.

‘The heavy hitter ads aren’t annoying, the Billy Fucillo ads are way more annoying,’ Simmons said. ‘Whatever it takes to sell your product within the law should be allowed.’

Published on February 25, 2007 at 12:00 pm