Bates v. State Bar of Arizona
United States Supreme Court
433 U.S. 350, 97 S.Ct. 2691, 53 L.Ed.2d 810 (1977)
- Written by Natalie Matheny, JD
Facts
Two Arizona lawyers, John Bates and Van O’Steen (defendants), ran a newspaper advertisement for their legal clinic, indicating that they offered legal services at very reasonable fees. The advertisement listed the defendants’ fees for the routine legal services offered at their clinic. Subsequently, the Arizona State Bar (State Bar) (plaintiff) filed a complaint against the defendants, as Arizona ethics rules prohibited all advertising by lawyers. The State Bar recommended suspension for each defendant. The defendants sought review of the State Bar’s disciplinary action, arguing that the Arizona ethics rules were unconstitutional. The Arizona Supreme Court rejected the defendants’ claims, and the defendants appealed to the United States Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Blackmun, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Powell, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.