1987 | 1988 | 1989 |
1991 | 1992 | 1993 |
1994 | 1995 | 1996 |
1997 | 1998 |
1999 | 2000
| 2001 | 2002 | 2003
| 2004 | 2005 |
2006 | 2007 |
2009 | 2010 |
2011 | 2012 |
2013 | 2014 |
2016 | 2017 |
Return to Media References Main Page
95/02/06: "Parody Purveyor Loses Appeal to Supreme Court," Folio:First Day,
at 1, 2 (potential trademark infringement liability for advertisement parody):
"Added New York City-based attorney Lawrence Savell: 'The bottom line is that your
ad parody must make it clear to readers that it is a parody or editorial, and that it is
not what it seeks to make fun of or comment on.'"
95/02/26: "It's best to beware of 'family memberships,'" Chicago Tribune,
at C10/Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale) at 9C; "Know your rights when joining
club," (divorce and golf club memberships) (both available in LEXIS-NEXIS News
"'There is still an element of discrimination,' said Lawrence Savell, an attorney
with the law firm of Chadbourne & Parke in New York City. 'Some clubs have the ability
to bar women from taking over memberships.'
"Restrictions usually exist in the smaller, private clubs, he said. 'It's like a
fraternity. There's a little more leeway to set policies.'
"Savell said some discriminatory policies are changing because of lawsuits, state
legislation and various state attorney general rulings throughout the country.
"The lawyer recommends that prospective country club members, married or single,
ask for a copy of the club's bylaws before joining. Ask, if it is a family membership, if
there is a designated primary member.
"Despite some progress toward equity in club membership, Savell believes the
greatest changes are occurring as a result of economic pressure.
"'The '90s are an era when people have less disposable income. And clubs are
dependent on maintaining memberships,' he said.
"Economics is making strides we haven't made before,' Savell suggested. 'The
reality, however, is that this continues to go on despite the economic aspects. And the
sense I get is that people decide not to take it to court.'"
95/03/06: "Lovable Lawyers: Bar Tells Lawyers to be Teddy Bears, Not Sharks,"
Associated Press Wire Service (image of lawyers); Associated Press, March
14, 1995 (available in LEXIS-NEXIS News Library); The Commercial Appeal (Memphis),
March 16, 1995, 1C (available in LEXIS-NEXIS News Library); Los Angeles Times,
March 26, 1995, at A8 (available in LEXIS-NEXIS News Library):
"'"L.A. Law" is unrealistic because if you watch it carefully, you'll
see they go home when it's still light outside,' joked New York City lawyer Lawrence
Savell. 'They have too much hair. . . . Lawyers I know always are pale and have high
95/03/15: "Snicker loses appeal to high court," Folio:The Magazine for
Magazine Management, at 16 (case involving advertising parody):
"Adds Manhattan attorney Lawrence Savell: 'The bottom line is that
your ad parody must make it clear to readers that it is a parody or editorial,
and that it is not what it seeks to make fun of or comment on.'"
95/03-04: "There's a fine line between ads and product liability," State
Bar News, at 18 (presentation at New York State Bar Association Annual Meeting, Food,
Drug & Cosmetic Law Section):
"Lawrence E. Savell of Manhattan, followed . . . with a presentation on
advertising language that invites litigation and how companies can minimize liability.
"Savell outlined some common liability pitfalls, such as not subjecting pictures
and other representations on packaging to the same scrutiny as the language itself.
Looking at common liability defenses, Savell advised that the product manufacturer can
still be found liable even if the 'state-of-the-art' medical or scientific knowledge
didn't indicate a product could pose the danger in question. Savell also said companies
must be careful in advertising an improved product not to indicate that the previous
version was dangerous. Lastly, he addressed the so-called 'learned intermediary' argument,
which holds that instructions such as 'see your doctor' on packaging transfer
responsibility to the physician. Savell warned that the intermediary can be circumvented
by excessive advertising.
"The attorney offered a long list of observations and guidelines to help the
product liability lawyer, including the following:
"Look at ads from another perspective
"Look at every piece of advertising as a plaintiff's lawyer would.
"Keep in mind that people and courts perceive advertising to be more powerful than
"Avoid absolute terms such as 'guarantee' and 'promise.' Instead of saying 'will,'
'do' or 'are,' use words such as 'may,' 'could,' 'possible' and 'variable.'
"Courts have been fairly flexible about allowing 'loose general praise' or puffing
in advertising, but they are less lenient in cases of drugs and medical devices.
"Avoid words such as 'safe, ''non-breakable,' 'foolproof' and 'accident-proof,' any
claim that product is free of elements that can cause injury. Even 'convenience' can be a
problem. Speak in comparative terms--i.e. 'tamper resistant' instead of 'tamper proof.'
"Never say or depict anything that contradicts your product warnings.
"Make sure warnings aren't lost in the shuffle of the advertising copy.
"While product liability attorneys would want to address all of these issues,
Savell said that in reality they are forced to make compromises with their clients. Savell
advised lawyers to set up a legal review procedure for each product, but if that can't be
done, to initiate a liability education program for the company's sales department. A
major point to make in dealing with stubborn clients, he said, is that the cost of
defending a liability claim can cripple a company just as much as losing ground in the
"'The bottom line,' he said, 'is you may have to strike a middle ground.'"
95/05/15: "Public pictures, private lives," Folio:The Magazine for
Magazine Management, at 23 (ruling in Popular Photography case):
"Had the lawsuit been filed in another part of the country, Hachette may have
found itself on the losing side, notes New York City-based media lawyer Lawrence Savell.
'The laws of other jurisdictions are broader than New York's, such that the disclosure of
private -- albeit accurate -- facts may be a ground for a claim elsewhere.'"
95/05-06: "Keep your advertising from attracting a lawsuit," Construction
"In many product liability lawsuits, plaintiffs allege that manufacturers'
promotional efforts played a role in causing their injuries. Here's how you can reduce
"Don't make promises. Don't use the words guarantee, warranty, or promise. Qualify
your language by using less-definite words like may, might, or could, or by referring to
results as possible, estimated, or variable. Also, make sure your product is depicted the
way you want it to be in the photo or illustration, especially with regard to safety
"Realize the limitations of warnings. First, a plaintiff might argue that the
warning was insufficient or that other laudatory statements undercut its effect. Second, a
plaintiff might argue that the warning itself is a concession that you are aware of some
inherent risk in using your product.
"Think like a plaintiff. While the law allows some latitude in puffery or sales
talk about products, be vigilant in evaluating all potentially troublesome language.
Source: Attorney Lawrence Savell in BrandWeek, cited in Metalworking Marketer."
95/06/00: "Product Liability: Who Sues?," American Demographics, at
48, 52 (defending against/avoiding products liability claims) (available in
In a presentation for the New York State Bar Association, attorney Lawrence Savell .
. . suggest[s] that copywriters avoid such absolutes as 'unbreakable,' 'harmless,'
'foolproof,' or anything else-'proof.' The term 'safer' is preferable to 'safe,' and
'minimal maintenance' is preferable to 'maintenance-free.'"
95/Summer: University of Michigan Law School Class Notes (formerly at
"Lawrence Savell was awarded a 1994 Certificate of Merit by the American Bar
Association's Standing Committee on Gavel Awards for his "Old Cars in Law" legal
column in Car Collector magazine. Savell, who practices with Chadbourne & Parke in New
York City, also is the legal columnist for Golf for Women magazine. He also published a
humorous article in the National Law Journal in April advocating simplification of rules
in the Bluebook, The Uniform System of Citation."
95/08/01: "Should magazine writers be paid overtime?," Folio:The Magazine
of Magazine Management, at 10 (available in LEXIS-NEXIS News Library)
("professional" status of writers under Wage and Hour Law):
"Lawrence Savell. an attorney with New York City-based law firm Chadbourne &
Park, says that different courts have reached different conclusions on this matter. The
two most recent rulings involve newspapers, but are important nevertheless. 'The
particular facts presented in each case appear to be key,' he says. In Sherwood v. The
Washington Post, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia last December ruled
that a reporter was not entitled to overtime because he was required to originate story
ideas, maintain a network of sources, write engaging, imaginative prose and produce
stories containing analysis of complex issues, and therefore was an 'artistic
professional.' But in January, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled in
Reich v. Newspapers of New England that reporters were entitled to overtime pay because
their day-to-day activities consisted of general assignment work - which requires
intelligence, diligence and accuracy rather than creativity, invention and imagination.
Generally speaking, magazine writers are more likely to be considered 'professionals' than
are newspaper reporters. One could argue, Savell says, that magazine writing is closer to
'artistic professions' such as 'cartoonists, essayists, novelists or scenario writers,' or
'persons holding the responsible writing positions in advertising agencies.'"