Peel v. Attorney Disciplinary Commission of Illinois
1990 United States Supreme Court case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Peel v. Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Comm'n of Ill.?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
Peel v. Attorney Disciplinary Commission of Illinois, 496 US 91 (1990),[1] was a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that Illinois' rule against attorneys advertising themselves as "certified" violated their freedom of speech under the First Amendment. The Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission (IARDC) had found that Peel's letterhead, which stated that he was "Certified Civil Trial Specialist By the National Board of Trial Advocacy," had broken state professional rules, and the Illinois Supreme Court had adopted their recommendation of public sanction.[2] The U.S. Supreme Court reversed, saying the letterhead was truthful, and the First Amendment favored disclosure over concealing information.[3]
This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; try the Find link tool for suggestions. (July 2021) |
Peel v. Attorney Disciplinary Commission of Illinois | |
---|---|
Argued January 17, 1990 Decided June 4, 1990 | |
Full case name | Peel v. Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission of Illinois |
Docket no. | 88-1775 |
Citations | 496 U.S. 91 (more) |
Argument | Oral argument |
Case history | |
Prior | Respondent censured, In Re Peel, 126 Ill. 2d 397 (1989); certiorari granted, 492 U.S. 917 (1989) |
Holding | |
Attorney advertising that accurately stated a private professional certification was not misleading, and therefore was protected as commercial speech under the First Amendment. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Plurality | Stevens, joined by Brennan, Blackmun, and Kennedy |
Concurrence | Marshall, joined by Brennan |
Dissent | White |
Dissent | O'Connor, joined by Rehnquist and Scalia |
Laws applied | |
U.S. Const. amend I |