{"id":4220,"date":"2004-10-07T22:25:20","date_gmt":"2004-10-08T02:25:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/formerlyknownas\/2004\/10\/07\/pape-chandler-pit-bull-papers"},"modified":"2011-08-05T14:58:22","modified_gmt":"2011-08-05T18:58:22","slug":"pape-chandler-pit-bull-papers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/2004\/10\/07\/pape-chandler-pit-bull-papers\/","title":{"rendered":"pape & chandler: pit bull papers"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a><\/p>\n

\n


\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

lightning flash–
only the dog’s face
is innocent<\/EM><\/FONT>
                        Issa<\/EM><\/FONT><\/A>\/Lanoue<\/EM><\/FONT><\/A><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/P><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

The <\/FONT>decision<\/FONT><\/A> in Florida Bar v. John Pape and Marc Chandler<\/EM>, along with the original Bar complaint, and P&C’s comprehensive Memorandum of Law , can be found at the <\/FONT>Pape & Chandler website<\/FONT><\/A>.  The Honorable Judge William W. Herring presided over the matter as Referee and ruled that neither the 1 (800) PITBULL number, nor P&C’s logo (depicting<\/A> the head of a pit bull in a spiked collar) are deceptive or otherwise violative of the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar; furthermore, the State’s lawyer advertising rules are unconstitutional restrictions on commercial speech as applied here by The Florida Bar.<\/FONT><\/P>
\n

\"dog Here is a particularly important quote from John Pape in the firm’s <\/FONT>Press Release<\/FONT><\/A> :<\/FONT><\/P>
\n


\n

“Our pit bull logo is not a hollow charade or a lame marketing gimmick. The logo represents what we believe our firm stands for: loyalty to our clients and to each other and tenacity, determination and aggressiveness in representing our injured clients.” . . . <\/FONT><\/P>
\n

“Over the past 3 years, we have spent over $100,000.00 in our own time and money defending ourselves pro se<\/EM> against the Bar. But the most disconcerting aspect of the entire 3 year ordeal with the Bar . . . is that it seems that the Bar is more focused on creating the superficial appearance of dignity and elitism in the legal profession by attempting to regulate what it sees as good taste in lawyer advertising than it is on focusing on what is really important. The superficial appearance of dignity does not create actual dignity or integrity. Our clients are the most important part of the profession, and the Bar should probably focus more on making sure that clients get loyal, diligent and competent representation from intellectually qualified and diligent attorneys.”<\/FONT><\/P><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

Congratulations to John and Marc (and to legal consumers, who are being treated like thinking adults).  [see our prior post here<\/A>] <\/FONT><\/P>
\n