The Marvelous Mr. Mazin

An Ontario personal injury lawyer has been reprimanded by the Law Society Tribunal Hearing Division for misleading advertising

As of September 2016, Mr. Mazin advertised on his website and other social media sites that he and/or other members of his firm were frequently retained to “take corrective action to fix the damage done by a less qualified lawyer;” that his was the firm that other lawyers sought out and called when they needed assistance; and that by focusing all of their energies on personal injury law, he and the lawyers at his firm had developed “an expertise that is difficult for other firms to match.” On Mr. Mazin’s Facebook page, his firm was described as “#Toronto’s Best Personal #Injury #Lawyers.”

While Mr. Mazin has, in the past, been retained on several occasions to take corrective action on behalf of clients, and although he has been involved in litigation of lawyers’ negligence claims, the terminology used both on his website and elsewhere for the purpose of promotion suggests to the reader something more than him simply taking remedial actions or being retained for the purpose of negligence litigation. Rather, it implies that Mr. Mazin and his firm have a level of expertise that cannot be matched by other lawyers, and that they are the best in their particular field.

As a busy lawyer practising exclusively in the field of personal injury law for more than a decade, Mr. Mazin may indeed have developed a high level of skill and knowledge in the area, and he is entitled to reflect this in his marketing. This may be done by, for example, and without limiting the scope of what is acceptable in this regard, referring to some of his cases or to courses or programs that he has taught or taken.

However, by describing his abilities in relation to those of other lawyers, and by suggesting his qualitative superiority to other lawyers, Mr. Mazin used descriptors and superlatives that were neither demonstrably true nor verifiable, and that were likely to mislead or confuse the public. Accordingly, I accepted the joint submission and found professional misconduct as alleged in respect of particular 1(a) of the Notice of Application.

Past results without disclaimer

Based on the joint submission, I also found professional misconduct in respect of particular 1(b). As of September 2016, Mr. Mazin marketed his previous successful results on his website and through other social media, including that he was “known for record breaking cases and multimillion dollar results” and that he had recovered multimillion dollar settlements for previous clients. Mr. Mazin also tweeted a client testimonial that indicated that the client had settled their case for 75 times what the insurance company had offered. Each of these statements appeared without an accompanying disclaimer indicating that past results are not necessarily indicative of future results. Mr. Mazin deleted some of the statements and added the requisite disclaimer in December 2017.

Recognition and third-party endorsements

As of September 2016, Mr. Mazin posted on his Facebook page that his firm was “rated by ThreeBestRated.ca to be in the top three personal injury lawyers in Toronto.” On his website, he indicated that he had been “voted best personal injury lawyer in Toronto” and was “voted Navigate Magazine’s #1 Toronto Personal Injury Lawyer in 2014.” He also displayed badges with the words “Million Dollar Advocates Forum” and “Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum.” 

The “Advocates Forum” group, which makes the badges available for use, is an American company. The badges can only be used by lawyers in their marketing (i) if a membership fee of US$1,200 is paid; (ii) if current membership, in good standing, in a state bar or law society is demonstrated; and (iii) if evidence is tendered of judgments or settlements in the aggregate amount of $1 million or more. On his own website, Mr. Mazin explained that the Million Dollar Advocates Forum badge is only available to lawyers who have settled or received a judgment of at least one million dollars on at least one case. In December 2017, Mr. Mazin removed the Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum badge from his website.

Three Best Rated® is a Canadian website which states that it was “created with a simple goal to find you the top 3 local businesses, professionals, restaurants and health care providers in any city.” The website describes the process of determining the top three businesses in any category as a “50-Point Inspection” that includes such categories as “Experience,” “Awards” and “Complaints.” Mr. Mazin did not solicit or seek out the ThreeBestRated.ca award, nor did he make any payment for it.

Navigate Magazine (“Navigate”) is a publication for nurses. Approximately nine years ago, the owner of Navigate started education sessions for nurses. The education sessions were originally proposed by a law firm as a way to market through education. Nurses would attend the engagements and receive education sessions. Presenters would pay a $1,000 sponsor fee per session and would also pay for the food at the restaurant where the session occurred.

Through Navigate’s parent company, Mr. Mazin conducted some of the educational sessions himself and brought in others to present at other sessions. Presenters, including Mr. Mazin, paid $8,000 in 2014 for eight sessions, as well as additional amounts to the restaurants and other speakers. At one session, Mr. Mazin conducted a mock trial for the nurses. At other sessions he discussed his provision of legal services and the intersection between personal injury law and healthcare. There were approximately 25 to 40 attendees per session.

The nurses who attended the sessions would vote after each educational session, rating the speaker from 1 to 5. The attendees were also asked whether they enjoyed the format of the presentation. The nurses who attended Mr. Mazin’s sessions stated in their feedback that they “loved” him. The owner of Navigate advised that Mr. Mazin “won the [Navigate] award fair and square” and that he did a great job for the nurses.

Expertise

 As of September 2016, Mr. Mazin advertised his “areas of expertise” on his website, which also described that, “[o]ur lawyers are experts and teach personal injury law.” On other social media sites he referred to himself as a “specialist” in personal injury law and advertised that his firm “specializes in brain injuries, spinal cord injuries and other serious injuries.” Mr. Mazin has since changed the language to reflect that his firm “deals in” (rather than specializes in) these areas.

A lawyer who has not been certified as a specialist by the Law Society in a specified field is not permitted to use any designation from which a person might reasonably conclude that the lawyer is a certified specialist (Rule 4.3-1 of the of the Rules

There is no indication that Mr. Mazin, or any of his associates, have been certified as a civil litigation specialist by the Law Society. Further, the current areas of specialization do not include personal injury law.

Sanction

 In the assessment of an appropriate penalty, there are a number of other mitigating factors to be considered in this case. Mr. Mazin has been in practice for 15 years and has no previous discipline history. He co-operated with the Law Society throughout the investigation and disciplinary proceedings, and significantly shortened the hearing by agreeing to the facts. During the investigation, Mr. Mazin made changes to his marketing methods and, by the time of the hearing, he had addressed all of the concerns raised by the Law Society in respect of his promotional activities.

I am satisfied that, in the circumstances, the joint submission is reasonable. A reprimand (a public recognition and denunciation of the misconduct) falls squarely within the range of the cases cited and, in my view, addresses both general and specific deterrence, while promoting public confidence in the legal profession. The costs proposed were also reasonable.

Shayne Kert authored the decision. (Mike Frisch)