California 20252026 Regular Session Status: To Executive 1 D cosponsors

SB 37 — Attorneys: unlawful solicitations and advertisements.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 645, Statutes of 2025.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Senate
  4. ✓
    Passed Assembly
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has been sent to the executive. Introduced December 03, 2024. It awaits signature.

Next likely step: the executive signs it into law or issues a veto.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 64% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

Moderate

How often bills like it became law.

  • To Executive

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 1 sponsor

    1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Single-party support

    Sponsorship is currently within one party (1 D).

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 8 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

Summary

(1) Existing law makes it unlawful for any person, firm, corporation, partnership, or association to act as a runner or capper for any attorneys or to solicit any business for any attorneys in and about certain locations, including prisons, jails, and county hospitals, or in any public place or upon private property, as specified. Existing law also makes it unlawful for a person to solicit another person to commit or join in the commission of a violation of that provision. Existing law defines "runner or capper" for these provisions to mean a person, firm, association, or corporation acting for consideration in any manner or in any capacity as an agent for an attorney or law firm in the solicitation or procurement of business for the attorney or law firm, as provided. Existing law prescribes a schedule of punishments for violating these provisions, including imprisonment and fines, as specified. Existing law also prohibits an individual, partnership, corporation, association, or any other nongovernmental entity from operating for the direct or indirect purpose of referring potential clients to attorneys, and prohibits an attorney from accepting a referral of those potential clients, unless certain requirements are met. Existing law additionally prohibits a referral service from being owned or operated by those lawyers to whom more than 20% of referrals are made. Existing law makes an individual, partnership, association, corporation, or other entity that engages, has engaged, or proposes to engage in violations of these provisions liable for a civil penalty, as provided. This bill would additionally authorize any person to bring a civil action for a violation of these provisions for statutory damages, as provided, attorney's fees, injunctive relief, and any other relief the court deems proper. The bill would require the court, in assessing the amount of statutory damages, to consider all relevant circumstances presented by the case, including the nature and seriousness of the misconduct and the defendant's assets, liabilities, and net worth. (2) Existing law imposes various requirements on the ownership of a lawyer referral service. Existing law provides that certain provisions relating to these lawyer referral services requirements shall not be construed to prohibit attorneys from jointly advertising their services. Existing law states that permissible joint advertising, among other things, identifies by name the advertising attorneys or law firms whom the consumer of legal services may select and initiate contact with. This bill would also provide that permissible joint advertising requires that each participating attorney or law firm execute a joint advertising agreement with the entity managing the joint advertising agreement with the entity managing the joint advertising services, under which the attorney or law firm expressly takes liability for the content of the advertising. (3) Existing law prohibits an advertisement, as defined, made by an attorney or law firm from making various prohibited statements and requires the advertisement to include certain disclosures, as specified. Existing law defines "advertise" and "advertisement" for these provisions to mean any communication, as specified, that solicits employment of legal services provided by an attorney, agent of an attorney, or law firm, and is directed to the general public and is paid for by, or on the behalf of, an attorney. This bill would revise those definitions and would define "advertisement" for purposes of those provisions to mean any communication, through any written, recorded, or electronic means, whether available to or directed generally to members of the public or to a limited group of individuals, that provides information concerning a lawyer or the lawyer's services for the purpose of encouraging individuals to secure the services of the lawyer or a law firm. The bill would define "advertise" for purposes of those provisions to mean to engage in any communication constituting an advertisement. (4) Existing law prohibits a legal advertisement from containing or referring to specified statements or representations, including prohibiting an advertisement from containing a guarantee or warranty regarding the outcome of a legal matter as a result of representation by an attorney, attorney's agent, or law firm. This bill would additionally prohibit an advertisement from containing misleading, deceptive, or false statements, words, or phrases regarding a lawyer's or a law firm's skills, experience, or record, and would also prohibit an advertisement from containing references to a lawyer's or a law firm's recognition by, or awards from, an organization, unless the recognition or award is not conferred by virtue of being a member of the organization and the organization does not charge or solicit a fee, cost, or payment for the recognition or award. The bill would also require a legal advertisement to contain specified information conspicuously displayed, or intelligible, if spoken, including disclosure of the city, town, or county of at least one bona fide office location or the address of record listed with the State Bar of California (State Bar) for the lawyer or law firm, as specified. (5) Existing law authorizes a person claiming a violation of specified provisions of law governing false, misleading, or deceptive legal advertising to file a complaint with the State Bar and requires a copy of the complaint to be served simultaneously upon the advertiser. Existing law provides a process whereby an advertiser may voluntarily withdraw the advertisement, within specified timelines, before or after the State Bar makes a determination of whether substantial evidence of a violation exists. Existing law provides that the State Bar review procedure applies only to licensees and certified referral services. Under existing law, if the State Bar determines that substantial evidence of a violation exists and the licensee or certified lawyer referral service who broadcasts the advertisement fails to withdraw the advertisement within 72 hours, a civil enforcement action may be commenced for an amount up to $5,000 for each individual broadcast. This bill would require a copy of the complaint to be personally served simultaneously upon the advertiser. The bill would limit the 72-hour deadline to withdraw an advertisement to an electronic broadcast, and for any other medium would require notice of withdrawal to be submitted to the State Bar within 72 hours and withdrawal to occur as soon as practicable, not to exceed 30 days. The bill would extend the application of the State Bar review procedure to individuals or entities that participate in joint legal advertising arrangements in compliance with specified provisions. The bill would authorize a consumer who was misled by an advertisement in violation of the bill's provisions to bring a civil action for specified damages and relief if the consumer first files a complaint with the State Bar under the above-described process, the State Bar determines that substantial evidence of a violation exists, and the advertiser does not withdraw the advertisement, or the advertiser withdraws the advertisement, but then subsequently rebroadcasts the advertisement, as provided. The bill would authorize a civil action under these circumstances for the damages described above, or for statutory damages, as provided, attorney's fees, injunctive relief, and any other relief the court deems proper, as provided. (6) Existing law prohibits, in advertising by electronic media for compliance with certain provisions, a message from being false, misleading, or deceptive, and requires the message as a whole to be factually substantiated. Existing law provides that a violation of this prohibition and requirement, among other provisions, is cause for discipline by the State Bar, as specified. This bill would expand the types of violations that would be a cause for licensee discipline, including, but not limited to, the provision prohibiting an advertisement from containing any false, misleading, or deceptive statement, or from omitting any fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of circumstances under which they are made, not false, misleading, or deceptive. (7) Existing law excludes media in which advertising in displayed and advertising agencies that prepare advertising content from specified provisions regulating to legal advertisement content. This bill would also exclude broadcasters that disseminate advertisements from the provisions regulating legal advertisement content. (8) This bill would make conforming changes.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 645, Statutes of 2025.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 2 p.m.

  4. Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 37. Noes 0. Page 2966.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.

  5. In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.

  6. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 78. Noes 1. Page 3278.) Ordered to the Senate.

  7. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  8. Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  9. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (August 29).

  10. July 16 set for first hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  11. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (July 8). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  12. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  13. July 1 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.

  14. Referred to Coms. on JUD. and APPR.

  15. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  16. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 36. Noes 0. Page 1529.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  17. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  18. Ordered to second reading.

  19. Read third time and amended.

  20. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  21. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 1188.) (May 23).

  22. Set for hearing May 23.

  23. May 12 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  24. Set for hearing May 12.

  25. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 13. Noes 0. Page 938.) (April 29). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  26. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  27. Set for hearing April 29.

  28. Re-referred to Coms. on JUD. and APPR.

  29. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.

  30. Referred to Com. on RLS.

  31. Read first time.

  32. From printer. May be acted upon on or after January 3.

  33. Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 1 voted No

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Passed 37 Yea · 0 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 28002
Republican 9001
Total 37003
% of votes cast 93%0%0%8%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Yea
Archuleta, Bob Democratic Yea
Arreguín, Jesse Democratic Yea
Ashby, Angelique V. Democratic Yea
Becker, Josh Democratic Yea
Blakespear, Catherine S. Democratic Yea
Cabaldon, Christopher Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Cortese, Dave Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Gonzalez, Lena A. Democratic Not Voting
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
McNerney, Jerry Democratic Yea
Menjivar, Caroline Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Not Voting
Pérez, Sasha Renée Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Richardson, Laura Democratic Yea
Rubio, Susan Democratic Yea
Smallwood-Cuevas, Lola Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wahab, Aisha Democratic Yea
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Alvarado-Gil, Marie Republican Yea
Choi, Steven S. Republican Not Voting
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Niello, Roger W. Republican Yea
Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie Republican Yea
Seyarto, Kelly Republican Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea
Valladares, Suzette Martinez Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 78 Yea · 1 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 59000
Republican 18101
Unaffiliated 1000
Total 78101
% of votes cast 98%1%0%1%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Ávila Farías — Yea
Addis, Dawn Democratic Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Ahrens, Patrick Democratic Yea
Alvarez, David Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bains, Jasmeet Democratic Yea
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Bennett, Steve Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Caloza, Jessica Democratic Yea
Carrillo, Juan Democratic Yea
Connolly, Damon Democratic Yea
Elhawary, Sade Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Garcia, Robert Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
González, Mark Democratic Yea
Haney, Matt Democratic Yea
Harabedian, John Democratic Yea
Hart, Gregg Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Krell, Maggy Democratic Yea
Lee, Alex Democratic Yea
Lowenthal, Josh Democratic Yea
McKinnor, Tina Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea
Ortega, Liz Democratic Yea
Pacheco, Blanca Democratic Yea
Papan, Diane Democratic Yea
Patel, Darshana R. Democratic Yea
Pellerin, Gail Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Ransom, Rhodesia Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rodriguez, Celeste Democratic Yea
Rodriguez, Michelle Democratic Yea
Rogers, Chris Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Schiavo, Pilar Democratic Yea
Schultz, Nick Democratic Yea
Sharp-Collins, LaShae Democratic Yea
Solache, Jr., José Luis Democratic Yea
Soria, Esmeralda Democratic Yea
Stefani, Catherine Democratic Yea
Valencia, Avelino Democratic Yea
Ward, Christopher M. Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Wilson, Lori D. Democratic Yea
Zbur, Rick Chavez Democratic Yea
Alanis, Juan Republican Yea
Castillo, Leticia Republican Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Yea
Davies, Laurie Republican Yea
DeMaio, Carl Republican Nay
Dixon, Diane Republican Yea
Ellis, Stan Republican Yea
Flora, Heath Republican Not Voting
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Gonzalez, Jeff Republican Yea
Hadwick, Heather Republican Yea
Hoover, Josh Republican Yea
Johnson, Natasha Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea
Macedo, Alexandra Republican Yea
Patterson, Joe Republican Yea
Sanchez, Kate Republican Yea
Ta, Tri Republican Yea
Tangipa, David J. Republican Yea
Wallis, Greg Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 11 Yea · 0 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 11000
Republican 0004
Total 11004
% of votes cast 73%0%0%27%
How each member voted (15)
Member Party Vote
Ahrens, Patrick Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Caloza, Jessica Democratic Yea
Elhawary, Sade Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
González, Mark Democratic Yea
Pacheco, Blanca Democratic Yea
Pellerin, Gail Democratic Yea
Solache, Jr., José Luis Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Dixon, Diane Republican Not Voting
Sanchez, Kate Republican Not Voting
Ta, Tri Republican Not Voting
Tangipa, David J. Republican Not Voting

Official roll call →

Passed 12 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 9000
Republican 3000
Total 12000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (12)
Member Party Vote
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Connolly, Damon Democratic Yea
Harabedian, John Democratic Yea
Hart, Gregg Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Pacheco, Blanca Democratic Yea
Papan, Diane Democratic Yea
Stefani, Catherine Democratic Yea
Zbur, Rick Chavez Democratic Yea
Dixon, Diane Republican Yea
Macedo, Alexandra Republican Yea
Sanchez, Kate Republican Yea

Official roll call →

3rd Reading

Passed 36 Yea · 0 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 27003
Republican 9001
Total 36004
% of votes cast 90%0%0%10%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Yea
Archuleta, Bob Democratic Yea
Arreguín, Jesse Democratic Yea
Ashby, Angelique V. Democratic Yea
Becker, Josh Democratic Yea
Blakespear, Catherine S. Democratic Yea
Cabaldon, Christopher Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Cortese, Dave Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Gonzalez, Lena A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
McNerney, Jerry Democratic Yea
Menjivar, Caroline Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Pérez, Sasha Renée Democratic Not Voting
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Not Voting
Richardson, Laura Democratic Yea
Rubio, Susan Democratic Yea
Smallwood-Cuevas, Lola Democratic Not Voting
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wahab, Aisha Democratic Yea
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Alvarado-Gil, Marie Republican Not Voting
Choi, Steven S. Republican Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Niello, Roger W. Republican Yea
Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie Republican Yea
Seyarto, Kelly Republican Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea
Valladares, Suzette Martinez Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 13 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 2000
Democratic 11000
Total 13000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (13)
Member Party Vote
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Yea
Arreguín, Jesse Democratic Yea
Ashby, Angelique V. Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wahab, Aisha Democratic Yea
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Niello, Roger W. Republican Yea
Valladares, Suzette Martinez Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 37 do?
(1) Existing law makes it unlawful for any person, firm, corporation, partnership, or association to act as a runner or capper for any attorneys or to solicit any business for any attorneys in and about certain locations, including prisons, jails, and county hospitals, or in any public place or upon private property, as specified. Existing law also makes it unlawful for a person to solicit another person to commit or join in the commission of a violation of that provision. Existing law defines "runner or capper" for these provisions to mean a person, firm, association, or corporation acting for consideration in any manner or in any capacity as an agent for an attorney or law firm in the solicitation or procurement of business for the attorney or law firm, as provided. Existing law prescribes a schedule of punishments for violating these provisions, including imprisonment and fines, as specified. Existing law also prohibits an individual, partnership, corporation, association, or any other nongovernmental entity from operating for the direct or indirect purpose of referring potential clients to attorneys, and prohibits an attorney from accepting a referral of those potential clients, unless certain requirements are met. Existing law additionally prohibits a referral service from being owned or operated by those lawyers to whom more than 20% of referrals are made. Existing law makes an individual, partnership, association, corporation, or other entity that engages, has engaged, or proposes to engage in violations of these provisions liable for a civil penalty, as provided. This bill would additionally authorize any person to bring a civil action for a violation of these provisions for statutory damages, as provided, attorney's fees, injunctive relief, and any other relief the court deems proper. The bill would require the court, in assessing the amount of statutory damages, to consider all relevant circumstances presented by the case, including the nature and seriousness of the misconduct and the defendant's assets, liabilities, and net worth. (2) Existing law imposes various requirements on the ownership of a lawyer referral service. Existing law provides that certain provisions relating to these lawyer referral services requirements shall not be construed to prohibit attorneys from jointly advertising their services. Existing law states that permissible joint advertising, among other things, identifies by name the advertising attorneys or law firms whom the consumer of legal services may select and initiate contact with. This bill would also provide that permissible joint advertising requires that each participating attorney or law firm execute a joint advertising agreement with the entity managing the joint advertising agreement with the entity managing the joint advertising services, under which the attorney or law firm expressly takes liability for the content of the advertising. (3) Existing law prohibits an advertisement, as defined, made by an attorney or law firm from making various prohibited statements and requires the advertisement to include certain disclosures, as specified. Existing law defines "advertise" and "advertisement" for these provisions to mean any communication, as specified, that solicits employment of legal services provided by an attorney, agent of an attorney, or law firm, and is directed to the general public and is paid for by, or on the behalf of, an attorney. This bill would revise those definitions and would define "advertisement" for purposes of those provisions to mean any communication, through any written, recorded, or electronic means, whether available to or directed generally to members of the public or to a limited group of individuals, that provides information concerning a lawyer or the lawyer's services for the purpose of encouraging individuals to secure the services of the lawyer or a law firm. The bill would define "advertise" for purposes of those provisions to mean to engage in any communication constituting an advertisement. (4) Existing law prohibits a legal advertisement from containing or referring to specified statements or representations, including prohibiting an advertisement from containing a guarantee or warranty regarding the outcome of a legal matter as a result of representation by an attorney, attorney's agent, or law firm. This bill would additionally prohibit an advertisement from containing misleading, deceptive, or false statements, words, or phrases regarding a lawyer's or a law firm's skills, experience, or record, and would also prohibit an advertisement from containing references to a lawyer's or a law firm's recognition by, or awards from, an organization, unless the recognition or award is not conferred by virtue of being a member of the organization and the organization does not charge or solicit a fee, cost, or payment for the recognition or award. The bill would also require a legal advertisement to contain specified information conspicuously displayed, or intelligible, if spoken, including disclosure of the city, town, or county of at least one bona fide office location or the address of record listed with the State Bar of California (State Bar) for the lawyer or law firm, as specified. (5) Existing law authorizes a person claiming a violation of specified provisions of law governing false, misleading, or deceptive legal advertising to file a complaint with the State Bar and requires a copy of the complaint to be served simultaneously upon the advertiser. Existing law provides a process whereby an advertiser may voluntarily withdraw the advertisement, within specified timelines, before or after the State Bar makes a determination of whether substantial evidence of a violation exists. Existing law provides that the State Bar review procedure applies only to licensees and certified referral services. Under existing law, if the State Bar determines that substantial evidence of a violation exists and the licensee or certified lawyer referral service who broadcasts the advertisement fails to withdraw the advertisement within 72 hours, a civil enforcement action may be commenced for an amount up to $5,000 for each individual broadcast. This bill would require a copy of the complaint to be personally served simultaneously upon the advertiser. The bill would limit the 72-hour deadline to withdraw an advertisement to an electronic broadcast, and for any other medium would require notice of withdrawal to be submitted to the State Bar within 72 hours and withdrawal to occur as soon as practicable, not to exceed 30 days. The bill would extend the application of the State Bar review procedure to individuals or entities that participate in joint legal advertising arrangements in compliance with specified provisions. The bill would authorize a consumer who was misled by an advertisement in violation of the bill's provisions to bring a civil action for specified damages and relief if the consumer first files a complaint with the State Bar under the above-described process, the State Bar determines that substantial evidence of a violation exists, and the advertiser does not withdraw the advertisement, or the advertiser withdraws the advertisement, but then subsequently rebroadcasts the advertisement, as provided. The bill would authorize a civil action under these circumstances for the damages described above, or for statutory damages, as provided, attorney's fees, injunctive relief, and any other relief the court deems proper, as provided. (6) Existing law prohibits, in advertising by electronic media for compliance with certain provisions, a message from being false, misleading, or deceptive, and requires the message as a whole to be factually substantiated. Existing law provides that a violation of this prohibition and requirement, among other provisions, is cause for discipline by the State Bar, as specified. This bill would expand the types of violations that would be a cause for licensee discipline, including, but not limited to, the provision prohibiting an advertisement from containing any false, misleading, or deceptive statement, or from omitting any fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of circumstances under which they are made, not false, misleading, or deceptive. (7) Existing law excludes media in which advertising in displayed and advertising agencies that prepare advertising content from specified provisions regulating to legal advertisement content. This bill would also exclude broadcasters that disseminate advertisements from the provisions regulating legal advertisement content. (8) This bill would make conforming changes.
Who sponsors SB 37?
SB 37 is sponsored by Umberg, Thomas J. (Democratic).
What is the current status of SB 37?
This bill has been sent to the executive. Introduced December 03, 2024. It awaits signature.
Where can I track SB 37?
Track SB 37 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 37

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Stay ahead of SB 37

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →