The Fifth Circuit's opinon is here and is definitely worth reading for anyone interested in the constitutionality of lawyer advertising rules. Ultimately, the Court affirmed the constitutionality of several provisions, but struck down as unconstitutional the following Louisianna Rules of Professional Conduct:
Rule 7.2(c)(1)(D), which prohibits "a reference or testimonial to past successes or results obtained, except as allowed in the Rule regulating information about a lawyer’s services provided upon request"
Rule 7.2(c)(1)(J), which prohibits the "portrayal of a judge or a jury, the portrayal of a lawyer by a non-lawyer, the portrayal of a law firm as a fictionalized entity, the use of a fictitious name to refer to lawyers not associated together in a law firm, or otherwise implies that lawyers are associated in a law firm if that is not the case"
and Rule 7.2(c)(10), which provides as follows: "Any words or statements required by these Rules to appear in an advertisement or unsolicited written communication must be clearly legible if written or intelligible if spoken aloud. All disclosures and disclaimers required by these Rules shall be clear and conspicuous. Written disclosures and disclaimers shall use a print size at least as large as the largest print size used in the advertisement or unsolicited written communication, and, if televised or displayed electronically, shall be displayed for a sufficient time to enable the viewer to easily see and read the disclosure or disclaimer. Spoken disclosures and disclaimers shall be plainly audible and spoken at the same or slower rate of speed as the other spoken content of the advertisement. All disclosures and disclaimers used in advertisements that are televised or displayed electronically shall be both spoken aloud and written legibly."
With regard to the last provision, the plaintiffs only challenged the portion relating to font size, speed of speech, and the requirement that a disclaimer be spoken and written in televised and electronic advertisements.