Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Attorneys Cannot Sue Avvo for Unauthorized Profiles According to Illinois Federal Court

By Brian Wheelin on September 16, 2016
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

An Illinois federal judge dismissed a proposed class action of lawyers whose business information was published by the online attorney database Avvo without their permission. The lead plaintiff, a Chicago-based personal injury lawyer, claimed that Avvo’s service violates the Illinois Right of Publicity Act.

Avvo is designated to permit users to search for attorneys by location, practice area and other criteria. The company generates revenues by offering attorneys the opportunity to purchase advertising space on competitors’ profiles or to ensure that others lawyers cannot promote on their profile.

In granting Avvo’s motion to dismiss, the Court relied on the First Amendment protection of publishing truthful newsworthy information. The decision compared Avvo’s business model to traditional newspapers that advertise space or a yellow pages directory where businesses can pay for a more prominent listing.

The lead plaintiff argued that Avvo, by selling advertising space through “sponsored” links, was participating in commercial speech. In support of this argument, counsel relied on a recent Seventh Circuit decision in a dispute between basketball icon Michael Jordan and Jewel Food Stores. In that case, Jordan sued Jewel when the grocery chain, without his permission, published an advertisement in a Sports Illustrated commemorative issue regarding Jordan’s induction into the Hall of Fame that featured Jordan’s basketball sneakers. The Seventh Circuit held that Jewel was not entitled to First Amendment protection since it was promoting its own brand.

The lead plaintiff argued Avvo was similar to Jewel. The Court disagreed noting that Avvo was more akin to Sports Illustrated, who merely published the advertisement.

Last month, Avvo avoided a similar suit in California after the lead plaintiff agreed to withdraw the case and pay Avvo’s attorneys fees after the company claimed the litigation violated California’s anti-censorship statute.

Photo of Brian Wheelin Brian Wheelin

Brian Wheelin is a member of the firm’s Business Litigation Group, where he focuses his practice on complex commercial litigation, including privacy and cybersecurity matters.

Brian has first-chaired cases to verdict as well as argued appeals before the United States Second Circuit and…

Brian Wheelin is a member of the firm’s Business Litigation Group, where he focuses his practice on complex commercial litigation, including privacy and cybersecurity matters.

Brian has first-chaired cases to verdict as well as argued appeals before the United States Second Circuit and state appellate courts in Connecticut and New York. He represents both individuals and companies in commercial litigation matters encompassing business torts, contract breaches, and disputes related to employment, real estate, and intellectual property.

Brian serves on the firm’s Electronic Discovery Committee. Read his full rc.com bio here.

Read more about Brian WheelinEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Business and Commercial, Privacy and Cybersecurity
  • Blog:
    Data Privacy + Cybersecurity Insider
  • Organization:
    Robinson & Cole LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo