Legal advertising is advertising by lawyers (attorneys at law) and law firms.

Legal marketing is a broader term referring to advertising and other practices, such as client relations and public relations.

In the United States

Main article: Legal advertising in the United States Certain marketing practices are considered illegal, and many others may be considered violations of legal ethics. Shock advertising, for example, would be considered unethical; directly soliciting clients (known as barratry, or "ambulance chasing") is illegal. The first major case law decision on legal advertising is the Supreme Court ruling in Bates v. Arizona State Bar 433 U.S. 350 (1977). The New York and Florida court systems proposed several restrictions on advertising in 2006 and 2007.[1] The N.Y. proposals, in particular, generated much controversy.[2] In 2005, New York State Bar Association President Vincent Buzard appointed a Task Force on Lawyer Advertising, chaired by Bernice K. Leber, to make proposals for consideration by NYSBA and the New York courts.[3] The new rules for New York were effective on February 1, 2007.[4] For the first time, the New York Legal system defined legal advertising, as: "any public or private communication made on or behalf of a lawyer or law firm about that lawyer or law firm's services, the primary purpose of which is for the retention of the lawyer or law firm."[5] The new rule specifically exempts communications to existing clients or other lawyers.[6] Publicity is, for the first time, also included as a synonym of advertising.[7] The newly revised rules now allow advertising about a lawyer's publications and "bona fide professional ratings".[8] There are certain special rules for email advertising, prohibiting spam.[9] The 2007 rules stated that advertising must not include a number of prohibited marketing devices: 1. Certain endorsements or testimonials from a former client 2. Portrayal of judges 3. Paid, undisclosed payment of testimonials 4. Portrayal of a judge, or fictitious lawyer or law firm 5. Use of actors or fictionalized persons 6. Irrelevant characteristics of the lawyers 7. Ads that resemble legal documents 8. Certain limits on soliciting new clients for 30 days after a tort 9. Certain other limits on communications with non-clients 10. Use of a nickname or moniker.[10]

The new New York rules were challenged by the national consumer advocacy organization Public Citizen, representing Syracuse law firm Alexander and Catalano, in Alexander v. Cahill, and Judge Frederick J. Scullin of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York struck down five of the rules as unconstitutional infringement of the First Amendment.[11] The endorsement, portrayals, "Irrelevant characteristics", and nicknames provisions were stricken; however, the domain name limitations, 30-day solicitation, and communications rules were upheld.[12] State Bar President Kathryn Madigan promised to work with the court system to develop new rules that will survive constitutional strict scrutiny.[13] The new Florida rules, and similar rules in Louisiana, have also been challenged by Public Citizen.[14]

Legal notices
Legal advertising can also, less commonly, refer to the legal notices, which are certain notices legally required to appear in circulating publications; they often appear in classified advertising sections of newspapers.[citation needed] Examples of legal notices includes certain public notice provisions (relating to pending government actions and meetings, especially about zoning), as well as advertisements seeking owners of unclaimed property, missing heirs, "deadbeat" parents, and potential class action plaintiffs.