• Home
  • About Me
  • Disclaimer

The Researching Paralegal

~ Articles and Research for Legal Professionals

The Researching Paralegal

Tag Archives: Legal Profession Prof

An Analysis of the Unauthorized Practice of Law.

04 Monday Sep 2017

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Legal Analysis, Legal Writing, Litigation, Unauthorized Practice of Law, Wrongful Death

≈ Comments Off on An Analysis of the Unauthorized Practice of Law.

Tags

Case Analysis, Legal Profession Prof, Mike Frisch, Unauthorized Practice of Law

Wrongful Death Case Filed for Late Spouse Not Null and Void as Unauthorized Practice, by Mike Frisch, Legal Profession Prof (with hat tip to William P. Statsky)

http://bit.ly/2xK44uo

A man’s wife dies in a hospital due to complications after surgery. He sues the hospital and other defendant in a wrongful death lawsuit. You can represent yourself in court without a lawyer, but can you represent someone else without a lawyer? No, you can’t. It’s called the unauthorized practice of law. So, how did he do it? -CCE

Share this:

  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Attorney Refusing Mental Health Eval Is Suspended By Florida Bar Association.

06 Monday Apr 2015

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Attorney Discipline, Legal Ethics, Rules of Professional Responsibility

≈ Comments Off on Attorney Refusing Mental Health Eval Is Suspended By Florida Bar Association.

Tags

Attorney Discipline, Florida Bar Association, Legal Ethics, Legal Profession Prof, Mental Health Evalution, Mike Frisch

Attorney Suspended For Refusing Mental Health Evaluation, by Mike Frisch, Legal Profession Prof

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_profession/2015/04/attorney-suspended-for-refusing-mental-health-evaluation.html

Janice L. Jennings, P.O. Box 103, West Palm Beach, suspended for 91 days, effective immediately, and indefinitely thereafter, until she complies with the terms and conditions set forth in a Feb. 19 court order and demonstrates rehabilitation. (Admitted to practice: 1985) Jennings refused The Florida Bar’s request that she schedule a mental health evaluation with Florida Lawyers Assistance. The request came after the Bar learned of a written filing and statements in which Jennings advised the court, among other things, that her former employer had caused the implantation of a microchip in her left ear that was designed to harm and disrupt her ability to function. (Case No. SC14-1218)

The Tampa Bay Times reported on the situation in June 2014

A June 16 Times article showed that she had been  telling federal judges for more than a decade that she was the victim of mind control and torture, with no apparent effect on her license to practice law….

Continue reading →

Share this:

  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Oops – Non-Lawyers and the Unauthorized Practice of Law.

28 Sunday Sep 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Ethics, Independent Paralegals, Lawyer Supervision, Paralegals/Legal Assistants, Unauthorized Practice of Law

≈ Comments Off on Oops – Non-Lawyers and the Unauthorized Practice of Law.

Tags

Ethics, Legal Advice, Legal Assistants, Legal Profession Prof, Mike Frisch, Non-Lawyers, Paralegals, STAND and Deliver Legal Services, Unauthorized Practice of Law

STAND And Deliver Legal Services, by Mike Frisch, Legal Profession Prof Blog

http://tinyurl.com/qjc6haw

There are certain things that paralegals, legal assistants, and any other non-lawyer legal professional cannot do.

  • We cannot appear in court on behalf of a client (when we’re not with our supervising attorney). Even then, we won’t be sauntering up to the judge’s bench to make argument or answer the Court’s questions).
  • And although I know some paralegals do this with their lawyer’s approval, we should not negotiate settlement on the client’s behalf. In these situations, my guess is that, the majority of the time, the client has no idea that the has delegated this task to a non-lawyers.
  • I’m going to go with faith that non-lawyers understand about client confidentiality.
    There are other things a non-lawyer cannot do, but the biggest is that we cannot give legal advice. If someone asks you a legal question, and you say, “I can’t give legal advice, but if I were you, I would . . . ,” that’s giving legal advice. The little signs you see next to discount shopping stores offering to do your divorce for a small fee are trying to sell legal advice. Even if you know the answer when a client asks you a question, the absolute best answer you can give is, “I don’t know – you’ll have to ask the lawyer.”

That brings us to this post. No doubt that the non-lawyer in this example had good intentions, and was trying to help. If you the non-lawyer in any situation, regardless of how much training or initials you have behind your name, you CANNOT GIVE LEGAL ADVICE.-CCE

Unauthorized practice decision of the Ohio Supreme Court is described by Kathleen Maloney:

A Lorain County non-lawyer and his corporation engaged in the unauthorized practice of law by providing legal advice to individuals facing criminal charges, according to an Ohio Supreme Court decision today.

The court directed King Ayettey Zubaidah and STAND, Inc., to stop practicing law and ordered them to pay a civil penalty of $20,000 for their involvement in four legal matters.

Zubaidah formed STAND (Striving Towards a New Day!) in 2008 after his experience with the justice system in the 1980s when he was convicted on a drug charge and sentenced to five years probation. STAND’s mission was ‘to help change the unfair and partial treatment against minorities in the judicial system.’

In each of the four cases brought before the Board on the Unauthorized Practice of Law (UPL), the defendant or a parent of the defendant asked for Zubaidah’s guidance during the criminal case and signed an agreement with STAND, which stated that the organization would assist them. No payment was required. Family members testified that Zubaidah did not claim to be an attorney and they knew he was not one.

In one matter, Isaiah Harris faced several charges in three different cases in 2008 involving the same victim. The court appointed a lawyer to represent him. Harris also signed an agreement with STAND.

The three cases were combined, and before Harris’ trial Zubaidah sent a letter to the judge indicating he had in-depth knowledge about the facts in the case and defending Harris’ actions.

In the midst of trial, Harris’ lawyer negotiated a plea deal for a four-year prison term. Zubaidah attended the trial, but his involvement was disputed. Harris’ lawyer claimed that Zubaidah advised Harris not to accept the deal. Harris rejected the offer and was later convicted and sentenced to 23 years, 6 months in prison.

In the other cases, Zubaidah sent letters to the judges asking for lower bonds, citing cases, and making legal arguments, though indicating that he was not an attorney.

In today’s per curiam opinion, the court noted that an individual who negotiates legal claims for another person and provides legal advice – even without charge and even when stating that he is not an attorney – is practicing law.

While a non-attorney who sends a character-reference letter for someone to a judge is not engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, the court stated that when a letter shifts to advocating specific legal positions for that person, the unauthorized practice of law occurs.

‘[D]espite the laudable desire to seek reform in the criminal system, such a desire cannot be realized by legally advising and advocating on behalf of a criminal defendant without violating our prohibition against the unauthorized practice of law,’ the opinion stated.

‘Zubaidah’s actions extended beyond the permissible conduct of endorsing a person’s character, advocating a social issue generally, advancing personal interests, or providing nonlegal advice to a family member. Despite Zubaidah’s good intentions and intermittent disclaimers, his conduct shows a pattern of advocating legal positions on behalf of defendants and providing legal advice to those defendants, leading to serious consequences for the STAND clients who trusted him.’

The court pointed out that Zubaidah held himself out as ‘an advocate with legal expertise,’ his agreements implied that he had specialized knowledge of the legal system, and his letters to judges ‘cited case law, raised legal issues, and asked for legal results.’ . . . [Emphasis added,]

Share this:

  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Legal Ethics Head’s Up – Don’t Get Drunk, Move A Dead Body, And Lie To Police.

10 Monday Feb 2014

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Attorney Discipline, Kansas Supreme Court, Legal Ethics

≈ Comments Off on Legal Ethics Head’s Up – Don’t Get Drunk, Move A Dead Body, And Lie To Police.

Tags

Attorney Discipline, Kansas Supreme Court, Legal Ethics, Legal Profession Blog, Legal Profession Prof, Mike Frisch, Robert A. Mintz

Someone Died, Someone Lied, by Legal Profession Prof (Mike Frisch), Legal Profession Blog

http://tinyurl.com/p3vxrmw

A partner-shareholder has an adulterous affair with one of the firm’s associates who suffered from depression and alcohol abuse. From there, it sadly got worse. -CCE

Share this:

  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...

Internet Use Admissible Evidence in Negligent Homicide Charge.

28 Saturday Dec 2013

Posted by Celia C. Elwell, RP in Criminal Law

≈ Comments Off on Internet Use Admissible Evidence in Negligent Homicide Charge.

Tags

Breast implant, Internet, Legal Profession Blog, Legal Profession Prof, Negligent homicide, New Hampshire Supreme Court

Internet Use Admissible In Death Of Child, by Legal Profession Prof, Legal Profession Blog

http://tinyurl.com/m879je5

A mother convicted of negligent homicide and related offenses after one of her children drowned in a bathtub and another was severely injured appealed, claiming the trial court erred in admitting evidence of her internet use while the children were in the tub.

Share this:

  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Pocket
  • More
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
Like Loading...
Follow The Researching Paralegal on WordPress.com

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Search

Sign In/Register

  • Create account
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.com

Categories

Archives

  • June 2024
  • March 2022
  • January 2022
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • January 2021
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • October 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • May 2019
  • March 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013

Recent Comments

lawyersonia's avatarlawyersonia on In Custodia Legis – Lega…
Eric Voigt's avatarEric Voigt on Top 20 Paralegal Blogs, Websit…
profvoigt's avatarprofvoigt on Research Guides in Focus – Mun…
Make Your PDF Docume… on Make Your PDF Document Edit-Pr…
madlaw291282999's avatarmadlaw291282999 on Using Hyperbole -Are You Riski…

Recent Comments

lawyersonia's avatarlawyersonia on In Custodia Legis – Lega…
Eric Voigt's avatarEric Voigt on Top 20 Paralegal Blogs, Websit…
profvoigt's avatarprofvoigt on Research Guides in Focus – Mun…
Make Your PDF Docume… on Make Your PDF Document Edit-Pr…
madlaw291282999's avatarmadlaw291282999 on Using Hyperbole -Are You Riski…
  • RSS - Posts
  • RSS - Comments

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • The Researching Paralegal
    • Join 460 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • The Researching Paralegal
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.

    %d