Im not defending the lawyer but couldn't it have been coincidental? If other women in the complex were victims as well maybe this was just a way to get more people to come forward. I don't think the lawyer really knew which car belonged to the victim. Did the other cars in the lot have the same flyer?

@itiswhatitis: I think it's trashy regardless. He wanted flyers to reach the victims, he knew he was inevitably going to leave one on a victim's car.

OK, that certainly tops the occupational therapist selling Amway to his home care clients!

@itiswhatitis: It could have, but I'm guessing the lawyer specifically targeted that entire building.

I see this the same as if someone were to put leaflets on cars at the LA Fitness in Pittsburgh that was just shot.

@katstermonster: I agree with you and I am in no way defending this guy, I was just wondering could it have been coincidental.

He obviously wasn't targeting her specifically (IMO - I have no proof), but the building itself was probably known as the home of multiple victims - which makes this still incredibly scummy. I mean, there could have been some altruistic reason for this (get more victims to come forward as stated) but I really super doubt it.

@itiswhatitis: Her car specifically, coincidental. That building? maybe not so much (or did he maybe do it at her place of work, or at the grocery? In which case, entirely coincidental - but still not exactly a classy move)

@itiswhatitis: "If other women in the complex were victims as well maybe this was just a way to get more people to come forward."

But that exact sort of direct marketing is barred by most state's ethical rules.

Think of it this way. Would you want an attorney going room to room in a hospital. "Hit by a car, huh. Have you thought about suing?" Sure, he's looking for potential victims, but he's also looking to drum up business.

Attorneys can do this sort of notification in class action lawsuits with a court's prior permission but only to a very specific class.

@GMFish: by doing this is there any recourse? Will the NJ Bar disbar him?

@itiswhatitis: How is it coincidental if his flyer was meant for victims of assault? If he was soliciting business from rape victims, having your target audience receive a flyer is kind of the point.

He - or some kid he paid - probably went through the lot and stuck one on each car. Just like the home repair ads I find in my door and the like. Annoying.

Improper? Depends on the rules lawyers live by there I guess. As I recall back in the old days lawyers weren't even allowed to advertise at all.

If they are allowed to advertise, what's wrong with putting flyers on cars (even though I hate it myself)?

Here is what is going on - once again, we can't risk making ANYONE uncomfortable. Someone might be upset by that, so we can't have it. Can't have a US flag because some illegal might be offended. Can't take peanut-butter sandwich to school because someday a kid who's allergic might enroll.............

In a fair and just society lawyers would need to advertise. However, we live in a cesspool with lawyers making a big turd.

I meant "wouldn't need to" above. Sorry.

@TinkishDelight: coincidental that it was placed on her car.

@HalOfBorg: 2/10. Started as a strong troll, only to get sidetracked into WAAAH NANNY STATE ILLEGALS AND PEANUT BUTTER.

The point of the article is that yeah, it probably is improper. The thing that's wrong with putting flyers on cars is the same thing that's wrong with soliciting people in a hospital: they are allowed to advertise but not to target specific people, basically, with few exceptions.

@TinkishDelight: If he placed the flyers on many cars or all cars in the parking lot of that apartment complex, or had put flyers on another set of cars somewhere else, or across town, then one can reasonably judge that the lawyer was not aware of that particular woman's circumstances. Considering the flyer was placed two months after the assault, I'd say that he knew exactly what he was doing.

I guess it comes down to that lawyerly phrase "known or should have known" that the rape victim, in particular, was going to specifically be advertized to since she lived in the targeted building. Including the phrase "in your building or apt." showed sufficiently to the Judge he knew what he was doing.

Now, if he had placed a billboard across the street, and didn't use the phrase "in your building or apt.", just "victim of rape or assault", then he probably would have been okay. Although, that still would have been cheezy...

On a related note, is anyone fed up with all the injury attorney ads on TV these days?

If the assault happened in Dec. 2006, and the flyer was placed two months after that...how come it's taken until 2009 for a panel to convene to discuss it? The article doesn't mention anything about whether the assault victim brought charges against the lawyer, or whether she had contacted any governing body to address the advertisements.

@TinkishDelight: If he stood at the door of a rape counselling clinic handing out business cards, that would have been unethical. This was similarly unethical (since he knew the victim(s) lived in that building), but he thought he could get away with it.

If he could have proved that he did it over a much larger area (like all apt. building parking lots in that zip code), it would probably have been okay.

@pecan 3.14159265 (now with star power): @itiswhatitis: Its not a coinincidence when the flyer is referring to people who have been raped in the building. Logically, the flyer is to get the attention of those who were victims of rape. Why would you put a flyer for something somewhere that it will never find an audience? Thats right, you wouldnt. In direct marketing, you market directly to those who you wish to gain business from, in this case rape victims.

@itiswhatitis: By targeting those Ads only at that building, the judge believed that he intended to make that "coincidence" happen.

@HalOfBorg: I agree with r4...that was a really long way to get to the troll bridge.

@Mecharine: I wasn't saying that it wasn't intentional, dude. I said he knew exactly what he was doing. Like I said, if he had placed the flyers in other areas of the town and on other cars, it would have been more acceptable that it was coincedental and that he didn't know the woman's circumstances. However, because she had reported the crime and other people had come out to bear witness of it happening to them, it would have been impossible for him to be unaware of it being reported in the media and in law circles.

I took the MPRE 2 weeks ago (Legal Ethics Test that all lawyers have to take in order to practice) and any good lawyer would know is that you cant do this kind of direct soliciting for business. This guy needs to crack open the Model Rules and start reading!

@Mecharine: Exactly my point, thank you. I've never seen a flyer touting legal services that were that specific. The lawyer knew what he was doing.

@wvFrugan: Heh, I work at a help desk for a very specific type of web application. On the first floor of our building is the office of an energy co-op that relies on multi-level marketing to sell it's services. I have actually had a caller who was familiar with our location (not really too hard to find out) try to pitch me on said MLM scheme, and then, when I declined, asked if she could just come by the office and talk to any of my coworkers who might be interested. I declined on their behalf. After I got her off the phone and relayed the story, they proved me right in saying that no, none of them were interested either.

It was not targeted at her. It was just coincidental.
People place fliers on cars all the time.

@dragonfire81: "I'm Don Law, Attorney at Law. Do you have fish? Do you need someone to come feed your fish? I'm an attorney. I'll come feed your fish."

oooo Lets all bash lawyers!!!!! Idiots

Unsettling, but an exploitative lawyer desperate for cash is the kind of lawyer you want.

@wargames2007: Did you actually read the article? He specifically targeted a building where it was known that multiple rapes had happened. How is that a coincidence?

I had a car accident in 2006. I got a ton of direct solicitations from personal injury attorneys in the mail. Minnesota, mind you, is not a state that places restrictions on this kind of attorney advertising. It was vaguely distressing that they got my name and number from police reports. However, I did need a lawyer, and it is free speech.

The actual problem is that in many states there are no clear rules as to what is acceptable or not. They rely on someone coming in and filing some grievance or such, then this barely-functional board makes some kind of determination and assigns some sort of penalty, fine, or directive (if anything).
The only place where I'm not annoyed by the personal injury or class action suit lawyers trolling for clients is where straight up advertising is forbidden. This way, lawyers have to subsist on networking, referrals, the sign on their place of business, and "seminars" and "orientation talks" in which the victims walk in on their own.

@krunkwizard: keyword: "good lawyer"

There are times when you want to take your law degree and turn it toward the wall. This Zemel guy should be sanctioned. Period! Whether that sanction should go the level of disbarment is a different issue and I would probably not go that far if it's his first disciplinary action.

@itiswhatitis: They probably won't disbar him unless he has a pattern of previous misconduct, but there are disciplinary proceedings against him, I believe.

@RecordStoreToughGuy: Hey, the legal job market is tough right now.

@Newvox: Most states have pretty clear rules about targeting people in this way, as do professional organizations like the AAJ and the ABA. I would be very, very surprised if NJ did not have such rules.

@pecan 3.14159265 (now with star power): @dragonfire81: PAY ATTENTION. THIS IS SERIOUS.

I see that on all those Mesothelioma ambulance-chaser ads.

Mr prf lwyrs r ll scm.

@HalOfBorg: Yeah. Screw those rape victims. That guy needs to make a living.

Add me to the list of Tasteless But Not Horrific camp. I can see victims not realizing it's not their fault when shoddy facilities managers don't police their buildings until someone reaches out to them, so it's a mixed situation.

A few years ago, a male attorney in California demanded sex from a female client, and when she wouldn't comply, he deliberately missed filing dates for her case and caused her to lose. When she complained to the bar, she found out this was okay in California.

Following this, it was proposed to the California bar that the rules be changed so lawyers could be sanctioned if they screwed over a client who refused their sexual advances. And there were lawyers who argued this should still be okay!

Some time later I saw a complaint in the press from a lawyer who couldn't understand why his profession wasn't being treated with more respect by the public.

@Trai_Dep: Whoops, after reading in the comments, I see how this crosses the line. Statement withdrawn. Thanks, braniacs!

@bobert:
Do you have a citation for that particular case? I'd be interested in reading it.

How about the fact that littering is illegal? It's ethical for a lawyer to break the most obvious of laws to promote his business?

Geez. I suppose it's of no surprise, though, you should see the wrangling the bar has had (and lost) over here just to try to prevent people from hiring paralegals to defend them on parking tickets.

Scum bag.

Didn't know whom he was soliciting as he solicited every tenent.

He will get his..... one day.

Hell = Lawyers eternal home

@bobert:

because 99% of all lawyers are evil scumbags deserving what they receive.