Mission College Edenfield v Fane Case Discussion | Homework Helper

Mission College Edenfield v Fane Case Discussion.
Scott Fane was a CPA licensed to practice In New Jersey and Florida. He built his New Jersy practice by making unsolicited phone calls to executives. When he moved to Florida, the Board of Accountancy there prohibited him (and all CPAs) from personally soliciting new business. Fane sued. Does the First amendment force Florida to forgo foreclosing Fane s phoning? Argument for Fane : The Florida regulation violates the First Amendment, which protects commercial speech. Fane was not saying anything false or misleading, but was just trying to secure business. This is an unreasonable regulation, designed to keep newcomers out of the marketplace and maintain steady business and high prices for established CPAs. Argument for Florida Board of Accountancy: Commercial speech deserves and gets a lower lever of protection than other speech. This regulation is a reasonable method of ensuring that the level of CPA work in our state remains high. CPAs who personally solicit clients and obviously in need of business. They are more likely to bend legal and ethical rules to obtain clients and keep them happy, and will lower the standards throughout the state.

Mission College Edenfield v Fane Case Discussion