Catchy legal advertising

March 23, 2011
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

When it comes to catchy law firms with catchy slogans, this one may have a winning hand.

I recently was in Savannah, Ga., and came upon this law firm in the city.Casino Law Group I assumed the firm deals with gambling-related issues, perhaps because of all of the casino references. A quick Internet search revealed the firm actually is a personal injury firm, and two of the people at the firm have the last name of Casino. To capitalize even more on the casino idea, its website is luckylegal.com. Way to play up the gambling theme.

The sign got me thinking about law firm advertising. I noticed on our drive to Georgia and back numerous billboards advertising for attorneys or legal services. I think my favorite one was near the Indiana/Kentucky border. It had a fake car that looked like it had crashed through the billboard. It even had headlights that worked. That made it stick out in my mind more than just your typical lawyer’s face on a billboard (although the car billboard may have also had the lawyer’s face on it. It was too dark to snap a picture).

Then there’s the commercial by a Kentucky law firm that claims to be the first one in 3-D. Catchy idea, and an even better one if you own a pair of 3-D glasses.

What’s the most interesting law firm ad you’ve ever seen?

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Law Firm Slogan
    Harrison & Moberly's slogan is:

    "Taking Care of Business"
  • Best (worst?). Ad. Ever.
    There was a billboard in Chicago that caused a lot of controversy a few years ago. One side of the billboard featured the chest area of an attractive man wearing only silk boxer shorts. The other side of the billboard showed the chest area of an attractive woman wearing only a lacey bra.

    In between it said "Life is too short. Get a divorce." And had the firm name underneath the picture.

    I think it was a day, maybe two before the city made them take it down. However, they got a lot of media attention over it for the next several weeks, so clearly it did what the firm wanted it to do...Gave them great publicity.

    I thought it was sleazy but very effective.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. I gave tempparry guardship to a friend of my granddaughter in 2012. I went to prison. I had custody. My daughter went to prison to. We are out. My daughter gave me custody but can get her back. She was not order to give me custody . but now we want granddaughter back from friend. She's 14 now. What rights do we have

  2. This sure is not what most who value good governance consider the Rule of Law to entail: "In a letter dated March 2, which Brizzi forwarded to IBJ, the commission dismissed the grievance “on grounds that there is not reasonable cause to believe that you are guilty of misconduct.”" Yet two month later reasonable cause does exist? (Or is the commission forging ahead, the need for reasonable belief be damned? -- A seeming violation of the Rules of Profession Ethics on the part of the commission) Could the rule of law theory cause one to believe that an explanation is in order? Could it be that Hoosier attorneys live under Imperial Law (which is also a t-word that rhymes with infamy) in which the Platonic guardians can do no wrong and never owe the plebeian class any explanation for their powerful actions. (Might makes it right?) Could this be a case of politics directing the commission, as celebrated IU Mauer Professor (the late) Patrick Baude warned was happening 20 years ago in his controversial (whisteblowing) ethics lecture on a quite similar topic: http://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1498&context=ilj

  3. I have a case presently pending cert review before the SCOTUS that reveals just how Indiana regulates the bar. I have been denied licensure for life for holding the wrong views and questioning the grand inquisitors as to their duties as to state and federal constitutional due process. True story: https://www.scribd.com/doc/299040839/2016Petitionforcert-to-SCOTUS Shorter, Amici brief serving to frame issue as misuse of govt licensure: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners

  4. Here's an idea...how about we MORE heavily regulate the law schools to reduce the surplus of graduates, driving starting salaries up for those new grads, so that we can all pay our insane amount of student loans off in a reasonable amount of time and then be able to afford to do pro bono & low-fee work? I've got friends in other industries, radiology for example, and their schools accept a very limited number of students so there will never be a glut of new grads and everyone's pay stays high. For example, my radiologist friend's school accepted just six new students per year.

  5. I totally agree with John Smith.

ADVERTISEMENT