In the Matter of Cohen

Citation261 Mass. 484
PartiesIN THE MATTER OF MAX WALDO COHEN.
Decision Date03 January 1928
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts

November 15, 1927.

Present: RUGG, C.

J., CROSBY CARROLL, & SANDERSON, JJ.

Attorney at Law Disbarment, Code of legal ethics, Advertising. Supreme Judicial Court. Constitutional Law, Freedom of the press.

While codes of legal ethics adopted by bar associations have no statutory force, they are illuminating as showing views entertained by organizations of members of the bar concerning the tests of proper conduct for those charged with the important functions of attorneys admitted to practice within the courts, and commonly are recognized by bench and bar alike as establishing wholesome standards of professional conduct. Per RUGG, C.J.

An attorney at law admitted to practice at the bar in the Commonwealth properly may be found, in a proceeding under G.L.c. 221, Section 40 as amended by St. 1924, c. 134, to have been guilty of professional misconduct, and be ordered suspended from practice for three months, if it appears that he has solicited business by an advertisement in a

Boston newspaper reading as follows: "Advice free in legal matters specialist marriage troubles; all cases; reliable; confidential; reasonable terms."

At the hearing of a petition for disbarment of the attorney at law for professional misconduct in the publication of the advertisement above described, it was proper for the court to refuse to rule: "The respondent has the same right and liberty to advertise his profession for the purpose of obtaining business as any other person or individual in the Commonwealth, and the only requirement or limitation upon said right is that the respondent should not deceive any individual or the public generally in so advertising."

At the hearing above described, it was proper for the court to refuse to rule that a canon of the Massachusetts Bar Association providing that

"solicitation of business by circulars or advertisements or by personal communications or interviews not warranted by personal relations is unprofessional" violates art. 12 of the Declaration of Rights of the

Commonwealth and the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution.

PETITION, filed by the Bar Association of the City of Boston in the Supreme Judicial Court for the county of Suffolk on July 21, 1926, and afterwards amended, seeking action by the court upon conduct of Max Waldo Cohen, an attorney at law.

The allegations of the petition as amended were in substance that Cohen, admitted to the bar of Massachusetts in

1902, had "been guilty of professional misconduct" in three publications of advertisement, the last of which, in a newspaper in Boston after the filing of the petition, is quoted in the opinion. The petition also set out a portion of Canon 28 of the Canons of Professional Ethics of the Massachusetts Bar Association and of the Bar Association of the City of Boston, which is quoted in the opinion. The respondent by his answer admitted the publications but claimed "the right to advertise and solicit business by circulars or advertisements, or by personal communications or interviews, notwithstanding the alleged Canon No. 28 set forth in paragraph 2 of the petition, and that the said Canon 28 has no application to your respondent, as your respondent is not a member of the Bar Association of the City of Boston, and is therefore not bound by any of the rules or regulations of the said Association."

Frederic H. Chase, Esquire, was appointed by the court under the provisions of G.L.c. 221, Section 40, as amended by St. 1924, c. 134, to conduct the proceedings.

The matter was heard by Braley, J. The respondent asked for, and the single justice refused to make, the following rulings:

"4. The respondent has the same right and liberty to advertise his profession for the purpose of obtaining business as any other person or individual in the Commonwealth, and the only requirement or limitation upon said right is that the respondent should not deceive any individual or the public generally in so advertising.

"5. Upon all the evidence, the petition does not state any case within the jurisdiction of the court over this respondent.

"6. The Canon No. 28 of the Bar Association of the City of Boston prohibits all advertising or soliciting of business by an attorney at law. This Canon violates the liberty secured to the respondent by the Constitution of Massachusetts, Article 12, as well as violates the Fourteenth Amendment of the Federal Constitution, and is therefore illegal and void."

The finding and order of the single justice are quoted in the opinion. The respondent alleged exceptions.

P.H. Kelley, for the respondent. F.H. Chase, specially appointed under St. 1924, c. 134.

RUGG, C.J. This is a proceeding designed to bring to the attention of the court for its disciplinary action professional misconduct of an attorney at law. A single justice upon a hearing "found that the respondent had been guilty of professional misconduct" and ordered "that he be suspended from the office of attorney at law in the courts of this Commonwealth, and from practising as an attorney at law therein, for the term of three months." The respondent's exceptions to the refusal to give three requests for rulings bring the case here.

The substance of the charges of unprofessional conduct is that the respondent being an attorney at law admitted to practice in this Commonwealth, solicited business by advertisements inserted in several Boston newspapers, one being in these words "ADVICE FREE in legal matters; specialist marriage troubles; all cases; reliable; confidential; reasonable terms. WHITE'S LAW OFFICE, 333 Washington St., Room 828." It is provided in the canons of ethics of the Massachusetts Bar Association and of the Bar Association of the City of Boston that "solicitation of business by circulars or advertisements, or by personal communications or interviews, not warranted by...

To continue reading

Request your trial
33 cases
  • In re Steen
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • 13 d1 Abril d1 1931
    ... ... juries when sitting as triers of facts from an observance of ... the manner and deportment of the witness ... In the ... matter of the disbarment of J. A. Smith, 73 Kans. 243, 85 P ... 584; In re Duncan, 42 S.E. 433; Griffith on ... Mississippi Chancery Practice, chapter ... L.Ed. 205; Bradley v. Fisher, 20 L.Ed. 646; 2 R. C ... L., page 1086, section 179; Re Max Waldo Cohen, 55 A. L. R ... 1309; Re Ole A. Stolen, 55 A. L. R. 1355, 193 Wis. 602, 214 ... N.W. 379; Re F. H. Reily, 7 A. R. L. 89; Re Carl Lentz, 50 L ... ...
  • McMurdo v. Getter
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 20 d1 Setembro d1 1937
    ...men may be held to a higher ethical code, for example by the restriction of advertising, than men engaged in ordinary business. Matter of Cohen, 261 Mass. 484,159 N.E. 55 A.L.R. 1309;Semler v. Oregon State Board of Dental Examiners, 294 U.S. 608, 55 S.Ct. 570, 79 L.Ed. 1086. The rule is gen......
  • In re Keenan
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 13 d6 Fevereiro d6 1943
    ... 313 Mass. 186 47 N.E.2d 12 MATTER OF WILFRED B. KEENAN. Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts. February 13, 1943 ...        October 9, 1942 ...        Present: ... this case has been cited by this court, sometimes with ... quotations of excerpts from the opinion. Matter of ... Cohen, 261 Mass. 484, 486. Matter of Ulmer, 268 ... Mass. 373 , 397. Matter of Stern, 299 Mass. 107, ... 109. These propositions are firmly ... ...
  • Lowell Bar Ass'n v. Loeb
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • 8 d3 Dezembro d3 1943
    ...of the bar is held to a high standard of honor and of ethical conduct. He may not advertise for business or solicit employment. Matter of Cohen, 261 Mass. 484 . Matter Maclub of America, Inc. 295 Mass. 45 , 48. Matter of Thibodeau, 295 Mass. 374 , 376. Commonwealth v. Brown, 302 Mass. 523, ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT