Thursday • February 16, 2006

Colorado holds that Consumer Protection Act applies to lawyer advertising

Comments (1)   TrackBacks (1)   E-mail this article

Today’s e-mail brings me the most recent edition of “Alert from Lawyers for the Profession”, an e-mail newsletter published by the law firm of Hinshaw & Culbertson. 

This issue calls attention to the recent decision in Crowe v. Tull, 126 P.3d 196 (Col. 2006), in which the Colorado Supreme Court held that Colorado’s Consumer Protection Act applies to lawyer advertising. The case is summarized in the Hinshaw Alert as follows:

“Plaintiff Richard Crowe filed an action under the Colorado Consumer Protection Act (CCPA) against his former attorneys, Marc Tull and the firm of Azar & Associates, who settled his car accident personal injury claim. He alleged that the attorneys had fraudulently claimed through a statewide program of television advertisements that the firm was highly skilled at negotiating with insurance companies and that the firm would obtain full value for its clients’ injuries. According to the Colorado Supreme Court, the ads claimed that the lawyers “will always ‘obtain as much as we can, as fast as we can’" while another ad portrayed the firm’s president ‘as the strong arm who muscles insurance adjusters into paying up.’ Crowe alleged that he had retained these lawyers on the basis of their ads but that he was ultimately  pressured into settling his $17,000 medical specials and $7,000 wage loss claim for only $4,000 due to the defendants’ ineptitude.

“The trial court held that Crowe’s CCPA claim duplicated his legal malpractice claim and that the practice of law was not a commercial activity governed by the CCPA. On appeal, the Colorado Supreme Court reinstated the CCPA claim.

“The Colorado Supreme Court held that the CCPA was intended to apply to all deceptive marketing practices and fraudulent advertising without regard to the defendant’s occupation. It declined to adopt the decision of the Washington Supreme Court to the effect that the comparable Washington statute could only apply to the so-called entrepreneurial aspects of legal practice. The Colorado Supreme Court held that the CCPA does not create liability for those who intend to live up to the pronouncements of their advertisements, but innocently or negligently fail to conform their conduct to their words. The court stated that on the record before it, there was sufficient evidence from which a fact finder could conclude that the defendants knowingly engaged in deceptive trade practices.”

Over the past several years, the Hinshaw firm has established itself as the premier national firm in the fields of professional responsibility, risk management and the law governing lawyers. Recent additions to the firm’s Professional Responsibility practice group include Anthony Davis in New York and Peter Jarvis in Portland, Oregon, who have each served in the leadership of the Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers (APRL).

You can request e-mail delivery of Hinshaw’s “Alert from Lawyers for the Profession” by visiting the “Resource Center” at the firm’s web site.