# Leoni v. State Bar

> California Supreme Court · August 22, 1985 · 39 Cal. 3d 609

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9553133

## Case

- **Full name:** ANDREW LEONI Et Al., Petitioners, v. THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA, Respondent
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** August 22, 1985
- **Citations:** 39 Cal. 3d 609; 217 Cal. Rptr. 423; 704 P.2d 183; 1985 Cal. LEXIS 325
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Kaus
- **Judges:** Bird, Grodin, Kaus
- **Cited by:** 55 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9553133

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that attorney advertising, though not false, was misleading because “[a] necessary 5 fact ha[d] been omitted”
- noting that Cal. Bus. & Prof.Code § 17200 and § 17500 “embrace not only advertising which is false, but also advertising which although true, is either actually misleading or which has a capacity, likelihood or tendency to deceive or confuse the public”
- holding that attorney advertising, though not false, was misleading because “[a] necessary fact ha[d] been omitted.”

## Opinion text

KAUS, J., Concurring and Dissenting.
I agree fully with the majority opinion, except as to one minor point: I do not think petitioners were charged with facts which would constitute a violation of rule 2-101(A)(4), nor do I believe that such a violation was proven. It seems to me that petitioners’ communications fairly trumpet their availability for professional employment.
*632 This minor difference of opinion in no way affects my agreement with the discipline imposed.
Petitioners’ application for a rehearing was denied September 25, 1985. Bird, C. J., and Grodin, J., were of the opinion that the application should be granted.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9553133. Public record. Not legal advice.