UPL and how it affects involved parties
Sep 3rd 2004, 12:51 am
#1
BE Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 368
UPL and how it affects involved parties
I am not 100% sure if I understand this correctly. I would like to be corrected if so as I do not want to step on toes if not. I do not want to accidentally make this look like I am accusing anyone (as I think people may think I am). But after researching the UPL topic I am coming up with more and more weird laws and open doors. In fact since all of the sites involved are innocent until proven guilty, no crime of UPL has occured and the below quotes are mute.
Here are rules of professional and ethical conduct for the california state bar.
Look at rule 1-600a. The term "member" means a member of the state bar (i.e. a lawyer). My understanding is that it says they can not participate in an organization that allows unlicensed persons to practice law. If so, and UPL as defined by some people occurs here (at this organization) does that mean that a lawyer would be placing themselves at risk of violating the state bar by being "members" (which implies an official affiliation) with websites like VJ or this? I am not sure. I DO appreciate the help of lawyers as I think it is nice they volunteer. But having read this, I do not want to place them at risk themselves or VJ or this site at risk either. I just want to find the right legal position. It would suck to place any of our websites at risk OR a great volunteer at the site because of not understanding the "rules". I just want to understand them.
Basically I want to make sure and find the way to understand UPL in all its facets and eliminate it from VJ and other places once there are some lines in the sand to give me direction.
Researching UPL is crazy! I am trying to look at all the angles fairly.
Any thoughts?
Here are rules of professional and ethical conduct for the california state bar.
Look at rule 1-600a. The term "member" means a member of the state bar (i.e. a lawyer). My understanding is that it says they can not participate in an organization that allows unlicensed persons to practice law. If so, and UPL as defined by some people occurs here (at this organization) does that mean that a lawyer would be placing themselves at risk of violating the state bar by being "members" (which implies an official affiliation) with websites like VJ or this? I am not sure. I DO appreciate the help of lawyers as I think it is nice they volunteer. But having read this, I do not want to place them at risk themselves or VJ or this site at risk either. I just want to find the right legal position. It would suck to place any of our websites at risk OR a great volunteer at the site because of not understanding the "rules". I just want to understand them.
Basically I want to make sure and find the way to understand UPL in all its facets and eliminate it from VJ and other places once there are some lines in the sand to give me direction.
Researching UPL is crazy! I am trying to look at all the angles fairly.
Any thoughts?
Rule 1-600. Legal Service programs
( A ) A member shall not participate in a nongovernmental program, activity, or organization furnishing, recommending, or paying for legal services, which allows any third person or organization to interfere with the member's independence of professional judgment, or with the client-lawyer relationship, or allows unlicensed persons to practice law, or allows any third person or organization to receive directly or indirectly any part of the consideration paid to the member except as permitted by these rules, or otherwise violates the State Bar Act or these rules.
( B ) The Board of Governors of the State Bar shall formulate and adopt Minimum Standards for Lawyer Referral Services, which, as from time to time amended, shall be binding on members.
Discussion:
The participation of a member in a lawyer referral service established, sponsored, supervised, and operated in conformity with the Minimum Standards for a Lawyer Referral Service in California is encouraged and is not, of itself, a violation of these rules.
Rule 1-600 is not intended to override any contractual agreement or relationship between insurers and insureds regarding the provision of legal services.
Rule 1-600 is not intended to apply to the activities of a public agency responsible for providing legal services to a government or to the public.
For purposes of paragraph (A), "a nongovernmental program, activity, or organization" includes, but is not limited to group, prepaid, and voluntary legal service programs, activities, or organizations.
( A ) A member shall not participate in a nongovernmental program, activity, or organization furnishing, recommending, or paying for legal services, which allows any third person or organization to interfere with the member's independence of professional judgment, or with the client-lawyer relationship, or allows unlicensed persons to practice law, or allows any third person or organization to receive directly or indirectly any part of the consideration paid to the member except as permitted by these rules, or otherwise violates the State Bar Act or these rules.
( B ) The Board of Governors of the State Bar shall formulate and adopt Minimum Standards for Lawyer Referral Services, which, as from time to time amended, shall be binding on members.
Discussion:
The participation of a member in a lawyer referral service established, sponsored, supervised, and operated in conformity with the Minimum Standards for a Lawyer Referral Service in California is encouraged and is not, of itself, a violation of these rules.
Rule 1-600 is not intended to override any contractual agreement or relationship between insurers and insureds regarding the provision of legal services.
Rule 1-600 is not intended to apply to the activities of a public agency responsible for providing legal services to a government or to the public.
For purposes of paragraph (A), "a nongovernmental program, activity, or organization" includes, but is not limited to group, prepaid, and voluntary legal service programs, activities, or organizations.
Rule 1-300. Unauthorized practice of Law
( A ) A member shall not aid any person or entity in the unauthorized practice of law.
( B ) A member shall not practice law in a jurisdiction where to do so would be in violation of regulations of the profession in that jurisdiction.
( A ) A member shall not aid any person or entity in the unauthorized practice of law.
( B ) A member shall not practice law in a jurisdiction where to do so would be in violation of regulations of the profession in that jurisdiction.
Last edited by Steve2003; Sep 3rd 2004 at 1:08 am.
Sep 3rd 2004, 1:45 am
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: UPL and how it affects involved parties
>Subject: UPL and how it affects involved parties
>From: Steve2003 member8695@british_expats.com
>Date: 9/2/2004 7:51 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: <[email protected]>
>I am not 100% sure if I understand this correctly. I would like to be
>corrected if so as I do not want to step on toes if not.
>Here are rules of professional and ethical conduct for the california
>state bar.
>Look at rule 1-600a. The term "member" means a member of the state bar
>(i.e. a lawyer). My understanding is that it says they can not partici-
>pate in an organization that allows unlicensed persons to practice law.
>If so, and UPL as defined by some people occurs here (at this organizat-
>ion) does that mean that a lawyer would be placing themselves at risk of
>violating the state bar by being "members" (which implies an official
>affiliation) with websites like VJ or this? I am not sure. I DO appre-
>ciate the help of lawyers as I think it is nice they volunteer. But ha-
>ving read this, I do not want to place them at risk themselves or VJ or
>this site at risk either. I just want to find the right legal position.
>Researching UPL is crazy! I am trying to look at all the angles fairly.
>Any thoughts?
>--
>-Steve \n K-Visa FAQ's at : http://www.visajourney.com/faq/k1faq.htm
>Posted via http://britishexpats.com
UPL is a broad in definition. I also read UPL in other states that lawyers that
are licensed to practice law are forbidden to participate discussions like
messageboard we have here.
>From: Steve2003 member8695@british_expats.com
>Date: 9/2/2004 7:51 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: <[email protected]>
>I am not 100% sure if I understand this correctly. I would like to be
>corrected if so as I do not want to step on toes if not.
>Here are rules of professional and ethical conduct for the california
>state bar.
>Look at rule 1-600a. The term "member" means a member of the state bar
>(i.e. a lawyer). My understanding is that it says they can not partici-
>pate in an organization that allows unlicensed persons to practice law.
>If so, and UPL as defined by some people occurs here (at this organizat-
>ion) does that mean that a lawyer would be placing themselves at risk of
>violating the state bar by being "members" (which implies an official
>affiliation) with websites like VJ or this? I am not sure. I DO appre-
>ciate the help of lawyers as I think it is nice they volunteer. But ha-
>ving read this, I do not want to place them at risk themselves or VJ or
>this site at risk either. I just want to find the right legal position.
>Researching UPL is crazy! I am trying to look at all the angles fairly.
>Any thoughts?
>--
>-Steve \n K-Visa FAQ's at : http://www.visajourney.com/faq/k1faq.htm
>Posted via http://britishexpats.com
UPL is a broad in definition. I also read UPL in other states that lawyers that
are licensed to practice law are forbidden to participate discussions like
messageboard we have here.
Sep 3rd 2004, 2:19 am
#3
BE Enthusiast
Thread Starter
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 368
Re: UPL and how it affects involved parties
Yeah, and maybe this is just good reading. I would like to state that unless you have a burning desire to respond to this thread we can just let it, well, fizzle out. After looking at the topic I think any "deep" discussion will just create another flaming thread.
lol
Peace everyone!
-Steve
lol
Peace everyone!
-Steve
