Pay It Forward

Two of the biggest spending local lawyer advertising firms in Chattanooga take great pride in showing their concern for the less fortunate by publicly giving away a few hundred dollars on either television or in their ad with our local newspaper which has selected them as “Best of the Best” for the past four years.  The other big media spender likes to publicly hand over the money to some needy person or organization on television in the amount of $500.00.  

 Both advertising law firms have adopted the term “Pay It Forward” it their ads.

When the two firms are not trying to encourage local injured parties (only certain personal injury cases accepted) not­ to hire the “Billboard Boys from Birmingham” they proudly offer to donate a $75.00 Food City Gift Card from November 11-20 to some lucky citizens.

While such small gestures of philanthropy are appreciated by the recipients, it does not in any way reflect on the ability (or lack thereof) to successfully receive full value in damages in an injured party’s personal injury case.

I encourage you to buy local products and hire local, reputable attorneys!

Lawyer Advertising & Marketing Symposium

On Friday, November 8, 2018, beginning at 1:00 p.m. a four hour panel discussion will be held at the University of Tennessee College of Law on the subject of lawyer advertising since 1978 when the topic was legalized by the United State Supreme Court in the landmark decision of Bates v. State Bar of Arizona.   Former Tennessee Supreme Court Justice and head of the Student Advocacy Center at UTK, Professor Penny White, will moderate the discussion on the negative and positive aspects of the publics enhanced “right to know” of the availability of lawyer services through advertising and marketing.

            Jerry H. Summers of Summers Rufolo & Rodgers, P.C. will give his opinions as to the good and bad of the subject and how it has changed the practice of law since the Bates decision.  Many of these views are already stated on his independent blog “truthinlawyeradvertising.com” that has been in existence for over a year.

            A representative of one of the large law firms in the area will speak on the subject of how they market the firm to the public under the standards of Bates and subsequent appellate decision by courts and actions of bar associations across the country.

            As of this date no one has come forward to speak on the more questionable area of lawyer advertising in the area of personal injury law as it applies to injured parties (plaintiff) as a result of car/tractor trailer accidents, defective products, medical malpractice, etc.

            Dual Continuing Legal Education credit has been approved for the symposium in the event any attorneys need to comply with the yearly (CLE) requirements established in this area of the legal system.

            UTK Law students have been invited to attend for what hopefully will be a lively discussion on how the topic of allowing attorneys to market their services in the media to the public has affected the image of the legal profession.     

            Additional information can be obtained from the UTK College of Law, 1505 Cumberland Avenue, Knoxville, TN 37996 (865) 974-4241.

Vintage Ads

I will continue to include vintage ads in the blog to illustrate that “deceptive advertising” existed before the Bates decision in 1977-1978, but was not allowed in the legal community.

AVVO Returns

After running into legal difficulties because of some of its techniques in dealing with consumers and potential attorney listings, Avvo has settled one of the controversies with the New York Attorney General’s Office by paying a fine of $50,000.00 and changing their consumer disclosures about how attorneys are rated and how Avvo posts legal forms to the website.

            The agreement follows the purchase of the company by Internal Brands in April 2018 from Avvo founder Mark Britton and four other chief executives.  The company’s use of a 1-10 rating system had been criticized and accused of favoring attorneys that update and build Avvo profiles.

            One of the requirements of the agreement with New York State is that Avvo must inform potential consumers that attorneys who upload a resume or submit a self-serving profile must state on Avvo’s website that those lawyers receive higher rankings on the 1-10 scale than lawyers who do not.  Whether the return of Avvo to the billion dollar lawyer advertising arena is for the benefit of the consumer seeking quality representation, attorneys who pay to list their alleged legal credentials or the financial benefits of Avvo is a decision that must be made by each.

            While it is legal to consider Avvo and other legal advertising services and the selected favorable client reviews it is respectfully suggested that potential clients for legal services solicit the opinions of other individuals in the community as to the qualifications of non-Avvo subscribing attorneys and then make their decision as to who they want to represent them.

I encourage you to buy local products and hire local, reputable attorneys!

He’s Back-Silly Blog

            After a respite of about 3 months for a hip replacement, hand injury and a non-invasive procedure for the problem that all males over the age of 50 incur during their lifetime, I am now ready to return to the rigors of a trial practice and to reinstate the “truthinlawyeradvertising.com” blog.  Said blog has received praise from many of the traditional non-media advertising lawyers and criticism from the radio, television, and website advertisers who often overstate their ability, often engage in deceptive practices and do not achieve full value settlements or jury verdicts for their clients because of their extensive advertising budgets.

            When I started the blog I was well aware of the risks involved in the changing legal environment since the U.S. Supreme Court made its ill-fated decision in 1978 in Bates by a 5-4 vote to allow lawyer advertising under the guise of the “public’s right to know” to find a lawyer.

            The purpose of the blog was and will continue to be the dissemination of truthful and non-deceptive information about the subject of lawyer advertising that will allow any potential client to make an informed decision as to who they should select to represent them or a loved one in the field of personal injury, bankruptcy, social security or criminal law which seem to be the areas involving the most coverage in lawyer advertising.  

            After some unsuccessful attempts to control the use of deceptive advertising several state regulatory bodies have abandoned most efforts to control often false and misleading representations as to quality of attorneys legal services, fairness of verdicts or settlements, and other factors that enter in to whether a client received a fair and just result in their case.

            On a personal note, criticism of the blog by a few of the largest radio and television advertisers has resulted in the blog being banned from dissemination to the membership of one of the lawyer associations in the State of Tennessee 

            I still support the group now and will do so in the future but will not abandon my beliefs that the advent of lawyer advertising since 1978 benefits only insurance companies, insurance defense lawyers, advertising agencies in several areas, and some lawyers who misrepresent their credentials and accomplishments and do not have the best interests of the clients that we have taken an oath to represent.

            The blog is back!  If you believe it is truthful, beneficial and helpful in your law practice send it to as many individuals or organizations possible.  I grant you permission to claim credit for its contents in any way!

            Here is the next blog entry on the resurrection of Avvo in New York State! 

I encourage you to buy local products and hire local, reputable attorneys!

Deceptive Ads Span the Test of Time!

Deceptive Ads Span the Test of Time!

Honest Abe as Dishonest Lawyer Advertiser?

On November 27, 1858 the Fourteenth President of the United States listed the following ad in a local newspaper in Illinois as a practicing attorney prior to his successful nationwide president campaign:

Lincoln and Herndon

Attorneys and Counsellors at Law

Will practice in the Court of Law

And Chancery in this State

--Springfield, Illinois

Fortunately, for our country, he was not disciplined or disbarred for his entry into the field of lawyer advertising.  

In an article in the July edition of the American Bar Association Journal, ABA Ethics Counsel Dennis Rendelman discussed a proposal by the Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility on “Lawyer Advertising” to be presented to the ABA House of Delegates for approval in Chicago at the ABA 2018 Annual Meeting.

He does a short historical review of the changing of the legal community’s attitude in the 1850’s towards lawyer advertising being completely prohibited through the present day almost non-existence efforts to control “deceptive” advertising since the adopting of the Bates decision by the United States Supreme Court in 1978.

A group formed in 1990, the Association of Professional Responsibility Lawyers (APRL) with an announced membership of 450 has submitted reports over the past four (4) years that has resulted in the proposed amendments to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct 7.1-7.5 that will be discussed in Chicago. 

Each reader of this Blog should acquire a copy of the present Model Rules and the proposal amendments and come to their own opinion and voice the same to the ABA. 

Do these proposal amendments adhere to the language of Justice Blackmun in Bates that “the judicial and legal community would regulate lawyer advertising to avoid deception in simple legal matters?”  Or does it further open the already saturated flood gates of the lawyer advertising field that allows almost any type of representations as to the qualifications of the soliciting attorney(s). 

Abraham Lincoln may have taken a bold step in his firm’s simple announcement but getting elected President in 1860 may have eliminated any bar association efforts to discipline him for his innocuous advertisement. 

I encourage you to buy local products and hire local, reputable attorneys!

Best of the Bidders?

It’s that time of the year again when our local daily newspaper loads up its financial bank account with its community appeal to have the public vote for the “Best of the Best” in over 50 categories during the month of June.  This marketing tool evidently has some effect because the competition has increased substantially this year.

            The multi-page “hearing aid” race to be the “best” produces significant income to our Arkansas based newspaper firm and who are they to object to “hearing aid” and “law firms” making website solicitations but now who are brazenly putting daily ads in the publication that promises to “give the news impartially without fear or favor(?)!”

            I am accustomed to the blown up and exaggerated claims of Chattanooga’s self-appointed “Big Time Lawyers Big Time Damages” boys but I have to admit that I am a little bit disappointed in my friend and capable divorce lawyer, Jennifer Lawrence, being lured into this price war to maintain her rightfully earned title of the “best” in divorce law for nine years in spite of any protestations by Glenna Ramer, David Noblit, Sandra Bott, Bill Horton, John Konvalinka and several others that are local attorneys and not from St. Louis.

            One enterprising and ambitious solicitor for votes has enticed the public with three drawings for 2 tickets to Dollywood (do I get to see Dolly?) on June 25, a $150.00 gift card on July 2 and a 50 inch LED 4K HDTV on July 9, none of which has anything to do with their business or profession.

            I am surprised that the best list of categories for attorneys has not expanded because it is a fertile field of potential revenue for the cash strapped tribunal.  Best Speeding Ticket Lawyer, Best Bad Check Lawyer, Best Light Law Lawyer, Best Jaywalking Defender, Best Bike Lane Violator Lawyer, Best Public Cussing Lawyer, etc.  The list is endless and just think of the prestige that will come with it.  Perhaps our local member of the Fourth Estate will come up with an appropriate plaque for $1,000.00 or website badge to show additional recognition and to pick up some more revenue.  

            I have to go now to click my votes for “pediatric dentist” (I have no children), “real estate broker” (at 77 I don’t need a multi-million dollar house), and any other of the over 50 appealing categories.  P.T. Barnum had it right in his famous statement about the public!

I encourage you to buy local products and hire local, reputable attorneys!

Avvo Creator Jumping Ship

In the April 24 edition of the electronic version of the ABA Journal, the revelation was made that the original creator of the above online service to connect consumers and attorneys had sold his interest in the company and was looking for new horizons to conquer.

            The fact that Avvo has been banned in some states by bar associations and courts, been a defendant in several lawsuits and a class action case did not deter the founder of Avvo from boasting that his company had helped many millions of consumers and hundreds of thousands of lawyers while he was heading Avvo.

            Since 2007 Avvo Legal Services has referred prospective clients to attorneys for a flat fee and additional payment of advertising costs.  Some state bar associations have asserted violation of statutes or court rulings pertaining to fee sharing with non-lawyers and the unlicensed practice of law.

            He basically criticizes the organized bar as being engaged in “protectionism” and reluctance to change.  He never discusses any aspect of the publics declining image of the legal profession and suggests that Avvo and other legal service providers will be responsible for further positive change in the profession.

            No mention is made of whether the legal profession has evolved into a legal business that has advanced the publics “right to know” as described in the 1978 directive from the United States Supreme Court.

I encourage you to buy local products and hire local, reputable attorneys!

Bell Cows or Judas Goats

Recently I received two new opportunities to be included in “America’s Top 100 Lawyers” in both civil and criminal law.  Unfortunately, hidden in the Selection Methodology of the application of both is that the prestige and prominence that I will receive is limited to fifty lawyers in each state rather than one hundred attorneys in the United States.

            Thus I can be only 1 of 5,000 world class litigators if I buy the membership, plaque, etc. or take advantage of the numerous opportunities to flaunt my talents (at a price).

            A new tactic is being used to stimulate membership (sucker list) by giving a couple of free listings in the state to members of the Bar who are actually qualified, competent, and widely respected attorneys in our profession who don’t need to advertise in this fashion to obtain business.

            I contacted two of my colleagues and made inquiry as to their selection for membership.  Both replied that they got a call with an offer of free membership if they would allow their names and background information to be used by the most recent of our 1,200 “Best or Top Attorneys” lists.

            Perhaps my colleagues will reap big bucks by letting their respected names be used to corral other nominees to another deceptive advertising scheme that inures to the profit of the selection agency but not to the clients or reputation of the legal profession.

I encourage you to buy local products and hire local, reputable attorneys!

Cable Television Ads

Whenever there is actual or proposed litigation involving a drug or product, a nationwide campaign by certain out-of-state law firms start a proliferation of ads on cable television soliciting the cases with the usual promises of easy money.

Most of these ads are designed to acquire as many cases as possible in order to place them in an actual or proposed class action where a race is always on in order for some firms to be on the plaintiffs committee where members receive the biggest share of any attorney’s fees.

Ads for Xarelto, Pradaxa, mesh screen, 1BC Filters, opioids, birth control devices, etc. are some of the current attempts to solicit as many potential lawsuits as possible throughout the United States.

The small print that moves quickly across the television screen at the bottom usually solicits the cases for law firms in Texas, California, Mississippi, etc. To date no Tennessee law firms have openly engaged in this form of cable television advertising that are shown in the Chattanooga market.

Some put a required disclaimer at the bottom that they do not suggest that they provide better legal services than other law firms “but some offer promises of how easy it is to receive compensation without going to court” is another example of advertising that goes beyond the original intent of the United States Supreme Court decision in 1978.

Having a local attorney you can reach and personally talk to when you have a potential case is a better alternative than calling an 800 number and get a sophisticated call answering service.

I encourage you to buy local products and hire local, reputable attorneys!

Morgan and Morgan Invades Chattanooga

Having already established satellite offices in Memphis and Nashville, Orlando, Florida, based advertising giant has indicated an advertising campaign in Chattanooga.

            On February 11, 2018, the firm displayed an ad on John Wilson’s Chattanoogan.com website advertising that they now had forty offices in eleven states and were the law firm “For the People.” No mention was made as to whether the firm that nationally advertises on all forms of media is planning on establishing a permanent Chattanooga office.

            With its patriotic slogan of “For the People, Not the Powerful” the firm claims to have 350 lawyers and a staff of support personnel of nearly 2,000 employees and has helped more than 100,000 clients nationwide.

            They have already launched a nationwide campaign on cable television soliciting mesothelioma cases along with 5-6 other out-of-state firms.

            How long will it take to set up a satellite office in the Dynamo of Dixie (formerly Chattanooga’s title) in order that the citizens of our fair city be saved from the incompetent 1,200 lawyers who have practiced here all their lives? (Pun intended)

            The media advertising market may become even more saturated when the big boys from Orlando come to Choo Choo City.

I encourage you to buy local products and hire local, reputable attorneys!

Who Loves Advertising Lawyers?

The above title is probably a misnomer!  It should read who loves deceptive advertising lawyers!

1. Injured plaintiffs who are desperate for money and are sucked in by glitzy commercials with promises of quick settlements.  The fact that their case if handled by a competent respected trial lawyer who has a good reputation can be worth much more than the quick offer of a settlement is overlooked;
2. Insurance defense lawyers who look good in the eyes of the insurance company claims adjusters when a case is settled by an advertising lawyer well below its actual value;
3. Insurance companies who are able to reduce their defense costs to insurance defense lawyers who settle the cases with advertising lawyers below the true value and therefore reap increased financial benefits to the stockholders of the company as increased;
4. Ad agencies, radio, television, website creators, newspapers, billboard companies and “Best of the Best 1200” sellers of plaques and listings are also reaping the benefits in excess of 1 billion dollars annually for producing the often deceptive commercials;
5. Paid actors who falsely represent that they were seriously injured and that a particular lawyer obtained a substantial settlement for them (they never say verdicts or final judgments).

            There are others who benefit from lawyer advertising, but these appear to be the most lucrative recipients.

I encourage you to buy local products and hire local, reputable attorneys!

Good Public Work by Lawyers

When the Hamilton County District Attorney’s Office recently indicted fifty-four defendants on the violation of the Reckless Enterprise and Reckless Conspiracy laws of the State of Tennessee, it became readily apparent that the pool of attorneys who normally accept appointments in Criminal Court would be depleted.  Several firms were conflicted out of handling some defendant’s cases because of prior representation of many of the accused.

            Judge Tom Greenholtz called upon members of the Chattanooga Bar for volunteers to participate in the defense of the defendants in this high profile case.

            Several law firms that normally do not practice criminal law quickly responded to the judges request and accepted appointments to represent the defendants to comply with the federal and Tennessee constitutional provision of providing legal counsel to indigent defendants at a much lower hourly rate than they normally charge in their civil practices.

            Noticeably absent were the television advertisers who proudly boast their commitment to their clients and the legal profession in their commercials that permeate the media in our area on television, radio, billboards, Carta busses, websites, newspapers, etc.

I encourage you to buy local products and hire local, reputable attorneys!

Lawyers Jokes

In 1996 a law professor addressed a meeting of the International Society of Barristers and listed seven examples of lawyer jokes and discusses what those examples of humor said about lawyers and lawyering:

      I.         PERCEPTIONS ABOUT LAWYERS

            Q: What’s the difference between a dead lawyer in the road and a dead skunk?

            A: There are skid marks by the skunk.

    II.         A CARING PROFESSION?

            Two balloonists are floating over the countryside in a hot-air balloon on a summer’s day.    Storm clouds move in, and the balloon is blown off course.  When there is a gap in the            clouds and a town appears below, the balloonists lower the balloon, and one of them           shouts at a man on the street below:  “Where are we?...Where are we?” “You’re in a      balloon.”  The balloonists look at each other, and one says: “That man is a lawyer.  His     answer was entirely correct but revealed absolutely nothing.”

  III.         PARTISANSHIP AND CLIENT FRAUD

            Q: Why did the research scientists substitute lawyers for rats in his laboratory          experiments?

            A: Lawyers breed more rapidly, they are less likely to become emotionally involved, and     there are some things that rats just won’t do.

 IV.         AN UNPRODUCTIVE AND PARASITIC ACTIVITY?

            Q: How can we solve the trade deficit with Japan?

            A: For each Japanese auto imported to the United States, we export one American lawyer    to Japan.

   V.         LITIGIOUSNESS AND FRIVOLOUS SUITS

            Q: How many lawyers does it take to change a light bulb?

            A: Three.  One to climb the ladder and unscrew the bulb, one to shake the ladder, and one   to sue the ladder company.

 VI.         TOO MUCH LAW, TOO LITTLE JUSTICE?

            In an L.A. Law episode, a friend jokingly asked Arnie Becker, “How are things in the         justice biz?” Arnie, prepared by the initiation rites of law school and a number of years   in the legal trenches, had a trenchant response: “Friend, you’ve got it wrong.  We’re not      in the justice business.  We’re in the law business.”

VII.         SOCIAL CONTRADICTIONS ABOUT LAW AND LAWYERS

            Why is there always a secret singing

            When a lawyer cashes in?

            Why does a hearse horse snicker

            Hauling a lawyer away?

            Can we as a profession look into the mirror and candidly state that legal advertising has advanced the image of our profession and eliminated or reduced the negative reflection on lawyers?

            The author concluded with the statement that “lawyers are a hard headed and unlovable breed but they are survivors, and society needs them.”

            Have we improved the public’s attitude towards our beloved profession in 22 years?

I encourage you to buy local products and hire local, reputable attorneys!

Tennessee Jury Verdict Reporter II

            As expected, last week’s “Silly Blog” evoked both praise and criticism for the reporting of the statistics in the above publication.  This offspring of my old legal acquaintance, Louis Laska, lists cases resolved in the personal injury field in Tennessee Circuit Courts from 2005-2017.  It is no certifier of whether the results are indicative of the true strengths and weaknesses of any particular case.  It does not include any factual figures about the adequacy of any settlements which is the area wherein I have ruffled the feathers of certain lawyers claiming to specialize in personal injury cases.  It also does not deal with the issue of deceptive and/or misleading dissemination of information to the group most entitled to the truth—the injured victims or their deceased relatives.

            However, if you can accept the statistics as being correct as reported by the “Circuit Court Clerk’s” as I do, it is one indicator that may address the accuracy and truthfulness in the field of lawyer advertising.

            The crux of my position is that as long as the courts allow lawyer advertising, although much of it is deceptive and misleading, I will hold my nose and tolerate it, although I disapprove of the unintended expansion of what “was to be limited to name changes, uncontested divorces, uncontested adoptions and simple bankruptcies” in the 1978 decision by the United States Supreme Court.

            If you agree with what I have been saying in these articles please pass them onto your client bases, friends and acquaintances. 

            You may be taking a positive step in elevating the poor image of the trial lawyers in our society.  I promise I won’t try to steal any of your cases and will give you and your firm proper credit.

I encourage you to buy local products and hire local, reputable attorneys!

Non Deceptive Newspaper Ads

           At the risk of being criticized for discussing deceptive ads in the Chattanooga area I would like to mention three ads that I do not think violate the provisions of the United States Supreme Court decision in 1978 which authorized the publics “right to know” on a limited legitimation of lawyer advertising.

            Attorney Richard (Dick) Teeter after the Bates decision started running an ad in the legal Chattanooga newspaper offering his legal services for uncontested divorces for $95.00.  Although his fees have increased to $345.00 over the years they still comply with the original intent of the Supreme Court to offer legal services for a reasonable price to the general public.

            A few years ago I asked competent civil and criminal attorney Dan Ripper not to run a rather bland article in the Chattanooga News Free Press stating he was interested in handling criminal cases.  I have since apologized to Dan for my request in light of the exaggerated and deceptive ads now prevalent in the personal injury field.  Dan has since been joined in his short ad by Amanda Dunn, an up and coming criminal and civil lawyer wherein they make the simple statement “Defending Your Rights” and tell how to reach them at their office.

            Grant, Konvalinka and Harrison is one of Chattanooga’s largest and best qualified law firms.  Occasionally they will conduct a free Estate Planning Workshop open to the public to attend and learn about Wills and Trusts in the probate field.  Their ad in the Chattanooga News Free Press simply states the holding of the seminar and its availability to the public and where and when it will be held.

            The advertisements of these three Chattanooga law firms are examples of what I believe the United States Supreme Court meant in 1978 when they allowed limited lawyer advertising.

            They do not include exaggerated or deceptive claims about the records of the law firms primarily in the personal injury field.

I encourage you to buy local products and hire local, reputable attorneys!

Tennessee Jury Verdict Reporter

An unidentified lawyer gratuitously sent me the above one inch thick 2017 volume which purports to list all jury verdicts from 2005-2017 in the State of Tennessee.

            Since we are daily bombarded by the five-six law firms on their radio-television commercials expressing what great trial lawyers they are I decided to check out their records on jury verdicts.

            Starting with the longest running lawyer advertising team, the firm claiming to have Inside Information, the record shows that the number two member of the firm went to court in 10 cases, with 7 being car wrecks and lost 5 of the 10 cases during this period.  A $150,000.00 verdict was obtained in Davidson County and in Hamilton County the largest verdict was $50,000.00.  The other member of the firm was more active as he allegedly tried 23 cases, winning 17 with a high verdict of $125,000.00.

            The self-appointed “Best Law Firm” in the Chattanooga Times Free Press poll reported only two defense verdicts for one attorney and the other superstar had two cases that he tried and lost both.

            The guy you have “got to get” to represent you lost two car accident cases from 2005-2017.

            The biggest billboard advertisers from Birmingham, Alabama, listed three FELA (Railroad) cases with verdicts between $172,000.00-$200,000.00 but no Hamilton County cases.   Two verdicts are from Shelby County and one from Knox County.  When those verdicts were obtained is not listed. Since they have only been spending their million dollar advertising campaign on television and billboards for about two years they may not have had time to get cases to trial.

            The “Had a wreck, need a check” lawyer from Huntsville, Alabama, has entertaining commercials but no reported jury verdicts during the reporting period and no lawsuits ever filed.

            Lastly, the dog loving firm that has two self-acclaimed champions of the injured has tried a total of one case from 2005-2017 with a jury verdict awarding their client $4,000.00.

            Each of these law firms have settled many cases that they acquired primarily though the power of advertising campaigns.  Does it accurately reflect their legal talents or does it suggest puffing and deception?

            Do these results match the glowing self-serving commercials expressing their ability to cause insurance companies and civil defense lawyers to cringe and cave in to their demands?

            The bigger question is whether clients are receiving full value of their cases when the other side (defense) knows that in the vast majority of cases they want a fast settlement to resolve the cases without expending a lot of time and expense to get the maximum recovery for the client?

            Below are their records as recorded in the Tennessee Jury Verdict for the years 2005-2017!

I encourage you to buy local products and hire local, reputable attorneys!

Dollars for Docs

            I am digressing from my usual weekly feature dealing with lawyer advertising to make you aware of a report that might not only surprise you but may also provide some interesting potential cross-examination material when dealing with physicians, hospitals, drug companies or medical device companies.

            Pharmaceutical and medical device companies are now required by law to release details of their payments to a variety of doctors and U.S. teaching hospitals for promotional talks, search and consulting, among other categories,

            The report covers the period from August 2013 to December 2015 and can be found by clicking on this link.

            Interesting statistics reveal that 1,074 Tennessee doctors in Chattanooga received part of the 172 million dollars paid statewide by Big Pharma and medical device companies.  Also a statewide total of 15,627 doctors got money from the two medical industries. Check on your hometown and see who is getting the money!

I encourage you to buy local products and hire local, reputable attorneys!