Naacp v. Button

371 U.S. 415 (1963)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Virginia Statutory regulation of unethical and nonprofessional conduct by attorneys outlaw, inter alia, solicitation of legal business in the form of 'running' or 'capping.' Prior to 1956, no attempt was made to proscribe under such regulations the activities of the NAACP, which had been carried on openly for many. In 1956 the legislature amended (Chapter 33) the provisions of the Virginia Code forbidding solicitation of legal business by a 'runner' or 'capper' to include, in the definition of 'runner' or 'capper,' an agent for an individual or organization which retains a lawyer in connection with an action to which it is not a party and in which it has no pecuniary right or liability. The Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals held that the chapter's purpose 'was to strengthen the existing statutes to further control the evils of solicitation of legal business . . . .' The court held that the activities of NAACP, the Virginia Conference, the Defense Fund, and the lawyers furnished by them, fell within, and could constitutionally be proscribed by, the chapter's expanded definition of improper solicitation of legal business, and also violated Canons 35 and 47 of the American Bar Association's Canons of Professional Ethics, which the court had adopted in 1938. Such activities on the part of NAACP, the Virginia Conference, and the Defense Fund constituted 'fomenting and soliciting legal business in which they are not parties and have no pecuniary right or liability, and which they channel to the enrichment of certain lawyers employed by them, at no cost to the litigants and over which the litigants have no control.' Finally, the court restated the decree of the Richmond Circuit Court. The NAACP's Virginia activities consisted of financing litigation aimed at ending racial segregation in public schools; the NAACP practice was to invite NAACP legal staff to explain to parents and children the legal steps necessary to achieve desegregation. The staff member would bring printed forms authorizing NAACP attorneys, rather than any particular lawyer, to represent the signers in desegregation suits.