6 N.J.L. 1635
June 30, 1997
148 N.J.L.J. 1338
June 30, 1997
OPINION 22
Communicating Former Service
as Municipal Court Judge
The Committee has received an inquiry from an attorney who
served as a municipal court judge in "numerous" cities and
townships from 1979 through and including 1983. He has asked
whether he may communicate the fact that he is a former municipal
court judge in advertisements to be published in the regional
newspaper and the Bell Atlantic Yellow Pages.
The information conveyed by a statement communicating one's
former service as a public official readily identifies for
consumers an attorney who has a familiarity with, is seeking, and
willing to handle a particular type of matter. See Opinion 4, 122
N.J.L.J. 746 (1988)(attorney may advertise by area of practice in
telephone directories) and Opinion 7, 127 N.J.L.J. 753
(1991)(attorney may communicate concentration in a field of
practice). This is consistent with the requirement that attorney
advertising be "predominantly informational." RPC 7.2(a).
However, the mere statement that one was once a municipal
court judge, without more, may be potentially misleading. Pursuant
to RPC 7.1(a)(1), a communication may be misleading if it "omits a
fact necessary to make the statement as a whole not materially
misleading." Information concerning the number of or exact years
of an attorney's service as a municipal court judge and the
municipalities in which that service took place will assist
consumers in determining whether or not the attorney possesses the
knowledge, experience and familiarity with local roads, businesses,
or police departments they are looking for in an attorney to
protect their rights. Conversely, the absence of such information
may lead the consumer to make a hasty or uninformed decision
concerning the choice of counsel. Consequently, we hold that an
attorney may advertise the fact that the attorney is a former
municipal court judge only if the attorney includes the years and
location(s) of service in the advertisement.