RÉSUMÉ DIGEST
SB 395 2020 Regular Session Cloud
Present law provides that unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or
practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce are unlawful.
Proposed law would provide that in any action brought by the attorney general under the
Uniform Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law in which the state prevails, the court
is required, in addition to relief granted by law, to award reasonable costs, investigative
expenses, and attorney fees to the attorney general.
Proposed law would provide that no person in any advertisement shall make, or permit to be
made, a false, misleading, or deceptive statement about a monetary result obtained on behalf
of a client or fail to disclose information necessary to prevent the information supplied in an
advertisement from being false, misleading, or deceptive.
Proposed law would define "actually received", "advertisement", "media entity", "monetary
result obtained", "false, misleading, or deceptive statement", and "person".
Proposed law would exclude a media entity as a person.
Proposed law would provide that any violation of proposed law shall be an unfair or
deceptive trade practice declared unlawful and shall subject the violator to any and all actions
and penalties pursuant to the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law. Proposed
law would provide that each iteration of an advertisement constitutes an unfair or deceptive
trade practice.
Proposed law would not apply to any media entity responsible for the production or
publication of any advertisement found to violate proposed law.
Proposed law would not apply to a media entity that is responsible for the carriage,
distribution, transmission, or display of any advertisement found to violate proposed law.
Proposed law would provide that in addition to all other remedies provided in the Unfair
Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, any person who is found to have made, or
to have permitted to be made on his behalf, a false, misleading, or deceptive statement under
the provisions of proposed law shall be liable to the attorney general for all costs, expenses,
and fees related to investigations and proceedings associated with the violation, including
attorney fees.
Proposed law would provide that an action to recover costs, expenses, fees, and attorney fees
shall be ancillary to and shall be filed and heard in the same court as a civil action filed for
the unfair or deceptive trade practice.
Would provide that the remedies and rights provided in proposed law are in addition to and
shall not preclude any right or remedy otherwise authorized by law, including the
enforcement of professional rules against the person by any licensing board or court.
Would provide that if a licensing board or court adopts a comparable rule and a process for
approval of advertisements, then the approval of an advertisement under that rule and process
shall constitute prima facie evidence of compliance with proposed law.
Would have become effective August 1, 2020.
(Proposed to adds R.S. 51:1407(F) and 1429)
VETO MESSAGE: "Please be advised that I have vetoed Senate Bill 395 of the 2020
Regular Session.
Senate Bill 395 provides for restrictions on attorney advertising and authorizes the Attorney
General to investigate advertising claims under the Unfair Trade Practices Act. This bill is
very similar to Senate Bill 115 of the 2020 Regular Session by Senator Pat Connick, which
I have signed into law. I have thus vetoed Senate Bill 395 for two reasons. First, since Senate Bill 115 is now signed, the enactment of Senate Bill 395 would lead to confusion and
duplication, as many of the provisions in the bills are nearly identical. Secondly, there is a
significant difference between the bills that raises concerns about the constitutionality of
Senate Bill 395. While Senate Bill 115 vests enforcement of its provisions with the Louisiana
Supreme Court, Senate Bill 395 gives that authority to the executive branch, namely the
Attorney General. This likely violates Article 5, Section 5 of the Louisiana Constitution
which vests authority over the practice of law with the Louisiana Supreme Court. The
Louisiana Supreme Court, by constitutional requirement and by practice, is best positioned
to implement any restrictions in a manner consistent with the protections in the United States
and Louisiana constitutions."