Publisher's Notebook

Actor Corbin Bernsen sued a Virginia Beach-based legal marketing firm in Norfolk federal court last month, claiming it owed him more than $600 grand on a million-dollar contract he signed to represent them in a marketing campaign aimed at lawyers.

Their answer: You were the one who broke the deal, pal. And now you owe us $600,000.

Sounds like a plot from “L.A. Law,” the show in which Bernsen played Arnold Becker, a high-rent divorce lawyer.

The Virginian-Pilot reports that in a counterclaim against Bernsen, Innovative Legal Marketing says that the contract with Bernsen includes what one could call a “good behavior” clause. Bernsen agreed not to commit “any act or do anything which may tend to bring Bernsen into public disrepute, contempt, scandal, or ridicule or which might tend to reflect unfavorably” on Innovative or its clients.

Bernsen broke the deal, Innovative alleges, by, among other things:
• Appearing on a Cartoon Network comedy sketch that made fun of personal injury lawyers.
• Talking about youthful drug use and sex life in an interview on “Celebrity Ghost Stories.”
• Getting into a bar fight on a film shoot in Ohio in August 2010. A local starting admiring one of Bernsen’s female assistants; the matter ended up outside a diner with Bernsen throwing gravel and telling the local man “If I had a gun, you’d be dead,” according to contemporary news reports.

Stay tuned.

Corbin Bernsen, the actor best known as high-rent divorce lawyer Arnold Becker in the 1980s show “L.A. Law,” has filed a $600,000 lawsuit in Norfolk federal court.

Bernsen claims that in 2009 he signed a $1 million deal with a Virginia Beach marketing firm for a “media campaign aimed at lawyers and law firms.” Things were fine for about two years; however, in June, he says, the company terminated the agreement. Bernsen says he is owed $668,000. The Virginian-Pilot has the full story.

You want to start a marketing campaign for your law practice that focuses on email.

You know that Virginia’s spam laws are pretty strict and you don’t want to end up blacklisted or a permanent resident of everyone’s spam box.

How do you negotiate the laws and regs that cover your proposal?

There’s a class for that.

It’s from the University of Virginia’s School of Continuing and Professional Studies. The class, entitled “Legal Aspects of eMarketing,” is held online one night a week from July 19 to Sept. 27.

The course is one of the offerings from U.Va.’s online graduate certificate program in emarketing. Registration is now open. Further details are available at the U.Va. SCPS site.

The class will cover how the Internet faces pressure from consumer groups and government regulators, and it will examine trends in emarketing laws and regulations, as well as techniques to comply with same. Some of the material to be covered includes recent court cases and final actions by regulatory agencies.

David O. Ward, a senior legal advisor at the Federal Communications Commission, teaches the course.

My friend and former colleague John Tuerck left legal journalism to work in legal PR. He spent some time with Hunton & Williams here in Richmond, then headed home to Boston. It’s probably easier to get Red Sox games on TV there.

John has started a blog called “Law Firm Public Relations and Communications.” And in a post published today, he puts an intriguing spin on the just-passed health care bill.

Regardless of your personal politics and viewpoint on the bill, its passage is a “PR bonanza” for lawyers, he said. It’s a chance for lawyers to explain, to educate and to provide insight into a complicated topic.

Lawyers who practice health care will no doubt be approached to explain the bill and its impact. But lawyers who practice in related fields – employee benefits, labor and employment, insurance, among others – likewise can tout their expertise.

Given the complexity of the material, and the sheer volume of the legislation (153 pages in the House reconciliation bill alone), there are numerous opportunities afoot for “lawyers and law firms looking for a bit of visibility,” he said.

“Dear VA Lawyers,” the e-mail message started.

Uh-oh. We’ve gotten junk mail addressed to “Ms. Virginia Lawyers Weekly” before. Once, Virginia nearly won the publisher’s clearinghouse sweepstakes.

“2009 has generated a lot of uncertainty for many people but there is one this of which I am sure – I am grateful to have you as a client!” it continued.

Wait a minute, I thought. I haven’t hired counsel. I checked the “to” line. Yep, that was me. I checked the sender’s name. Who? I don’t know Elizabeth Ziemba, whose office is in Brookline, Mass.

Elizabeth’s message continued, “One thing that does remain constant throughout the years is the appreciation I have for the clients with whom I work. I am inspired by your dedication and hard work. Getting to know you and meeting your immigration goals is the best part of my job.”

Hmm. I definitely didn’t hire an immigration lawyer this past year.

Sending a thank-you marketing e-mail was a really good idea, Elizabeth.

Here’s an even better idea: Check over the list before you send out the message. And, oh, don’t use your own e-mail address as the return address. That’s the fastest way to get blacklisted in the e-mail world and that’s a bad thing.

Elizabeth concluded her message to ‘VA Lawyers” with, “May the New Year bring health, happiness and success to you, your family and friends.”

That’s a really good thought, too. Back at you, Elizabeth.