Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, June 28, 1995 TAG: 9506280023
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: LAURENCE HAMMACK STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
If you believe you have been injured by exposure to asbestos, the ads advised laborers for the railroad and other industries, contact attorney Wayne Inge. People who responded received lung X-rays and were advised of their legal rights in mass meetings held in motel banquet rooms.
This week, the result is showing up in Roanoke Circuit Court: Inge is filing 213 lawsuits on behalf of people who claimed they were injured by breathing asbestos fibers in the workplace.
More than two-thirds of the product-liability lawsuits are being brought by former employees of Norfolk Southern Corp., Inge said, and they name as defendants more than 30 companies that manufactured, sold or installed products that contained asbestos.
Inge said the television and newspaper advertising "was not the cheapest way, but it was certainly the quickest way" to reach a large number of prospective clients.
Once forbidden by court rules, advertising by lawyers has become more commonplace in recent years and more accepted by a profession that once considered it unseemly. But "target advertising" such as Inge's campaign has shifted the debate from the propriety of lawyers who tout their general services to those who go after a more specific audience.
"It's a two-way situation," said William Rakes, a Roanoke lawyer and past president of the Virginia State Bar.
"You can argue that, because of the advertisements, suits are being filed that otherwise would not have been filed, and that it is clogging up the court system," he said.
"On the other hand, you could argue that there are individuals out there who have valid claims that would otherwise not be addressed."
Rakes and other lawyers interviewed Tuesday stressed that they were commenting on target advertising in general, and not the specifics of the lawsuits filed by Inge.
Inge is not the first to embark on target advertising in the Roanoke area; other lawyers have used the technique for breast implant cases and hearing loss claims against the railroad.
But as court clerks worked overtime this week to process the mountain of paperwork produced by the spate of lawsuits, some lawyers expressed surprise that the advertising campaign produced so many cases.
Inge said he was contacted by as many as 400 people as a result of the ads. He has spent the past 18 months determining which people had legitimate claims, excluding some cases in which the statute of limitations had expired. Inge said he expected to have all 213 suits filed by the end of the week.
Some lawyers consider target solicitations no different from a lawyer's advertising his expertise in a certain area of law, such as wills or real estate, said Roger Mullins, a Tazewell lawyer and past president of the Virginia Trial Lawyers Association.
"Certainly, it's legal, so long as it is not deceptive in any way," Mullins said. "Target advertising is nothing more than a way to market one's practice, and the end result is that consumers are given the opportunity to determine, 'Do I have a claim, and, if so, can I get it resolved?'''
"The flip side," said Charles Dorsey, president of the Roanoke Bar Association, "is that it's crass commercialism, it's distasteful and true professionals don't need to do it."
Dorsey said there is a "wide spectrum" of opinion among local lawyers on target advertising.
Not surprisingly, views on the topic are often divided between personal injury lawyers and members of large firms that are more likely to represent insurance companies and businesses that are subject to lawsuits.
Most lawyers are quick to distinguish target solicitation from some lawyers' practice of contacting victims still traumatized by disastrous accidents or approaching grieving relatives of people who have been killed.
"But you're still dealing with personal injury" with target advertising, Rakes said, "and you're dealing with people in many cases who are not very sophisticated when it comes to selecting lawyers."
The danger with legal advertising of any kind, he said, is that attorneys with little experience or training can pass themselves off as experts in legal fields from A to Z.
"You can look in the Yellow Pages and see ads for people who say they can specialize in everything from adoption to zoning," Rakes said.
In the asbestos cases, Inge said he is acting as co-counsel with James Humphreys, a West Virginia lawyer who has handled thousands of such cases dating back to 1987.
Although the bulk of the cases involve former railroad workers, employees from other industries and private contractors scattered throughout Western Virginia were also drawn in by the advertising.
"From a public policy standpoint, I have a hard time saying it's not right to advise people what kind of claims they may have," Roanoke lawyer Brent Brown said.
"To me, I think it's a question of the lawyer's motivations. If the lawyer's motivation is to serve the public and to redress legitimate injuries before a jury of the injured person's peers, I would feel comfortable with it.
"But if the lawyer's motivations are centered around lining his or her own pockets, then I'm very uncomfortable with the situation."
by CNB