84-F-79 - Vacated*

*Vacated by the Board of Professional Responsibility on September 11, 2015 due to changes in the law or rules.

FORMAL ETHICS OPINION 84-F-79


Inquiry is made concerning the propriety of engaging in advertisement of
legal services for admiralty inquiries while working on the river as well as
other workers' compensation claims generally without the audible or visual
disclaimer as provided for in DR 2-101(C).


Maritime torts are defined as civil wrong committed on navigable waters. See Pierside
Terminal Operators, Inc. v. M/V Floridian, D.C., Va., 374 F. Supp. 27, 30. "Admiralty"
and "maritime" law are virtually synonymous. See Black Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition,
p. 44.
Ethical Consideration 2-14 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides for the
admiralty exception when stating fields of specialty and begins by stating:
In some instances, a lawyer confines his practice to a
particular field of law.
It appears that the proposed advertisement contains fields of law other than admiralty and
that the attorney does not confine his practice to admiralty. Therefore, both the audible
and visual disclaimer provided for in Disciplinary Rule 2-101(C) of the Code are required
in all advertising, including "Jones Act" matters.
In the event the practice of the attorney is restricted to admiralty alone, neither the audible
nor visual disclaimer is required in any of his advertisements.
This 17th day of October , 1984.
ETHICS COMMITTEE:
O. B. Hofstetter, Jr.
Jerry Colley
William R. Willis
APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD