Unauthorized Practice of Law
Oct 8th 2010, 7:26 pm
#1
Account Closed
Thread Starter
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 119
Unauthorized Practice of Law
I thought I'd post this for the benefit of the Board. Lately, I have been reading some posts from non-lawyers that clearly are proffering specific legal advice. This is something even lawyers are usually very careful of, especially on a forum like this. I would think non-lawyers would be even more careful given potential criminal consequences. Sometimes it is a blurry line between general advice vs. specific legal advice but boy I've seen some whoppers on here lately.
Anyway here are some ULP cases you might want to take a look at.
Also, here is the District Attorney's Manual on ULP http://da.co.la.ca.us/pdf/UPLpublic.pdf
4. Prosecution for the Unauthorized Practice of Law
An individual accused of engaging in the unauthorized practice of law faces a variety of consequences, anything from a cease and desist letter to criminal prosecution. Prosecutions include penalties from $25 to $500 and violations such as a first-degree misdemeanor. Oftentimes, the primary tools to control the unauthorized practice of law are generated from consumer fraud acts that prohibit the impersonation of an attorney and have been used to prosecute criminally nonattorneys who appear in court as if they were attorneys or who prepare legal documents.
a. Statewide Grievance Committee v. Patton:1 Defendants provided customers a form to indicate the type of service they requested. The service provided legal documents for nonlawyers to file in their own uncontested legal actions. The question was whether the acts performed were those commonly understood to be the practice of law.
b. Attorney Grievance Commission v. Hamilton:2 The attorney was charged with violating the rule that prohibited a lawyer from assisting unlicensed persons in the unauthorized practice of law when the attorney failed to adequately supervise a paralegal in the representation of a church at a zoning hearing.
c. Davis v. Woolridge:3 Lawsuit filed against 40 independent paralegals in the San Bernardino County Superior Court charging the paralegals with unauthorized practice of law. This suit was filed in 1997.
d. In re Reed:4 The court ruled that Christine Mandjik, who runs Affordable Court Assistance and is a nonlawyer bankruptcy petition preparer, did not engage in the practice of law by advising a debtor about which exemption to select on her bankruptcy papers.
e. In the Matter of Arons:5 A lawsuit was filed in the Supreme Court of the State of Delaware by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel against Marilyn Arons and others for engaging in the unauthorized practice of law. Arons runs the Parent Information Center of New Jersey and provides services to parents of disabled children in due process headings before administrative agencies.
f. Florida Bar v. Catarcio:6 Florida Supreme Court ruled that a paralegal may not use the phrase "free consultation" to advertise legal form preparation service.
g. Furman v. Florida Bar:7 The Florida Bar prosecuted a former legal secretary and tried to have her jailed for helping poor and middle-income people complete routine divorce forms. The Florida’s governor granted her a pardon and she did not serve any jail time.
h. Oregon State Bar v. Smith:8 Robin Smith, an independent paralegal who ran Peoples Paralegal Service, was put out of business after being successfully sued for unauthorized practice of law.
Anyway here are some ULP cases you might want to take a look at.
Also, here is the District Attorney's Manual on ULP http://da.co.la.ca.us/pdf/UPLpublic.pdf
4. Prosecution for the Unauthorized Practice of Law
An individual accused of engaging in the unauthorized practice of law faces a variety of consequences, anything from a cease and desist letter to criminal prosecution. Prosecutions include penalties from $25 to $500 and violations such as a first-degree misdemeanor. Oftentimes, the primary tools to control the unauthorized practice of law are generated from consumer fraud acts that prohibit the impersonation of an attorney and have been used to prosecute criminally nonattorneys who appear in court as if they were attorneys or who prepare legal documents.
a. Statewide Grievance Committee v. Patton:1 Defendants provided customers a form to indicate the type of service they requested. The service provided legal documents for nonlawyers to file in their own uncontested legal actions. The question was whether the acts performed were those commonly understood to be the practice of law.
b. Attorney Grievance Commission v. Hamilton:2 The attorney was charged with violating the rule that prohibited a lawyer from assisting unlicensed persons in the unauthorized practice of law when the attorney failed to adequately supervise a paralegal in the representation of a church at a zoning hearing.
c. Davis v. Woolridge:3 Lawsuit filed against 40 independent paralegals in the San Bernardino County Superior Court charging the paralegals with unauthorized practice of law. This suit was filed in 1997.
d. In re Reed:4 The court ruled that Christine Mandjik, who runs Affordable Court Assistance and is a nonlawyer bankruptcy petition preparer, did not engage in the practice of law by advising a debtor about which exemption to select on her bankruptcy papers.
e. In the Matter of Arons:5 A lawsuit was filed in the Supreme Court of the State of Delaware by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel against Marilyn Arons and others for engaging in the unauthorized practice of law. Arons runs the Parent Information Center of New Jersey and provides services to parents of disabled children in due process headings before administrative agencies.
f. Florida Bar v. Catarcio:6 Florida Supreme Court ruled that a paralegal may not use the phrase "free consultation" to advertise legal form preparation service.
g. Furman v. Florida Bar:7 The Florida Bar prosecuted a former legal secretary and tried to have her jailed for helping poor and middle-income people complete routine divorce forms. The Florida’s governor granted her a pardon and she did not serve any jail time.
h. Oregon State Bar v. Smith:8 Robin Smith, an independent paralegal who ran Peoples Paralegal Service, was put out of business after being successfully sued for unauthorized practice of law.
Oct 8th 2010, 7:41 pm
#2
Peace onion
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: Denver
Posts: 5,686
Re: Unauthorized Practice of Law
So every question that comes on here should be answered with "We're not lawyers - go consult a lawyer"?
The forum would be rather dull, wouldn't it? None of us have claimed to be lawyers, or are practicing law.
Advice and opinions come with the usual caveat emptor.
The forum would be rather dull, wouldn't it? None of us have claimed to be lawyers, or are practicing law.
Advice and opinions come with the usual caveat emptor.
Last edited by Octang Frye; Oct 8th 2010 at 7:43 pm.
Oct 8th 2010, 8:08 pm
#3
American Expat
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,598
Re: Unauthorized Practice of Law
I understand that it cuts into the bottom line when people get free information.
Which is worse, the bad information coming from laypeople, or the bad information coming from the lawyers? We don't even have a lawyer on here who can properly articulate why a VWP applicant would get a 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) charge. It sounds like this forum is in deep trouble if everyone else stopped discussing the law too.
Every post in response to a question should be "Call a lawyer, and have your credit card number ready".
Perhaps BE should add a banner stating that nothing on here should be construed as an attorney/client relationship when people create an account.
Are there any cases you can show where no money changed hands?
Last edited by crg; Oct 8th 2010 at 9:17 pm.
Oct 8th 2010, 8:35 pm
#4
Passport Collector
Joined: Jan 2007
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 725
Re: Unauthorized Practice of Law
Unless I am mistaken, UPL is based entirely on state law. Why is it that attorneys can practice immigration law in other states without fearing UPL? I know immigration law is federal and the same nationwide, but nevertheless this does not appear to shield them from UPL claims from other states.
Or maybe there is a constitutional issue that state law can not preempt and regulate the practice of law for federal matters? But if so, then you should not have been liable for UPL violations by a state with respect to advice on federal matters.
And btw, if both parties receiving and giving advice aren't in a US state, state law has no jurisdiction whatsoever.
Or maybe there is a constitutional issue that state law can not preempt and regulate the practice of law for federal matters? But if so, then you should not have been liable for UPL violations by a state with respect to advice on federal matters.
And btw, if both parties receiving and giving advice aren't in a US state, state law has no jurisdiction whatsoever.
100,000 Nigerians are sending emails to screw people out of their money, and the US Attorney is going to swoop into this forum? Many of the posters aren't even in the US, including me.
I understand that it cuts into the bottom line when people get free information.
Which is worse, the bad information coming from laypeople, or the bad information coming from the lawyers? We don't even have a lawyer on here who can properly articulate why a VWP applicant would get a 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) charge. It sounds like this forum is in deep trouble if everyone else stopped discussing the law too.
Every post in response to a question should be "Call a lawyer, and have your credit card number ready".
Perhaps BE should add a banner stating that nothing on here should be construed as an attorney/client relationship when people create an account.
I understand that it cuts into the bottom line when people get free information.
Which is worse, the bad information coming from laypeople, or the bad information coming from the lawyers? We don't even have a lawyer on here who can properly articulate why a VWP applicant would get a 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) charge. It sounds like this forum is in deep trouble if everyone else stopped discussing the law too.
Every post in response to a question should be "Call a lawyer, and have your credit card number ready".
Perhaps BE should add a banner stating that nothing on here should be construed as an attorney/client relationship when people create an account.
Last edited by dreamercon; Oct 8th 2010 at 8:42 pm.
Oct 8th 2010, 8:44 pm
#5
Account Closed
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 2
Re: Unauthorized Practice of Law
Unless I am mistaken, UPL is based entirely on state law. Why is it that attorneys can practice immigration law in other states without fearing UPL? I know immigration law is federal and the same nationwide, but nevertheless this does not appear to shield them from UPL claims from other states.
Or maybe there is a constitutional issue that state law can not preempt and regulate the practice of law for federal matters? But if so, then you should not have been liable for UPL violations by a state with respect to advice on federal matters.
And btw, if both parties receiving and giving advice aren't in a US state, state law has no jurisdiction whatsoever.
Or maybe there is a constitutional issue that state law can not preempt and regulate the practice of law for federal matters? But if so, then you should not have been liable for UPL violations by a state with respect to advice on federal matters.
And btw, if both parties receiving and giving advice aren't in a US state, state law has no jurisdiction whatsoever.
I seem to remember there are some States that do have a UPL law.
Oct 8th 2010, 8:51 pm
#6
Peace onion
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: Denver
Posts: 5,686
Re: Unauthorized Practice of Law
SusanPai,
You say, "Lately, I have been reading some posts from non-lawyers that clearly are proffering specific legal advice."
Please cite specific examples of people dispensing legal advice.
Thanks.
You say, "Lately, I have been reading some posts from non-lawyers that clearly are proffering specific legal advice."
Please cite specific examples of people dispensing legal advice.
Thanks.
Oct 8th 2010, 9:34 pm
#7
BE Commentator
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 8,427
Re: Unauthorized Practice of Law
Unless I am mistaken, UPL is based entirely on state law. Why is it that attorneys can practice immigration law in other states without fearing UPL? I know immigration law is federal and the same nationwide, but nevertheless this does not appear to shield them from UPL claims from other states.
Or maybe there is a constitutional issue that state law can not preempt and regulate the practice of law for federal matters? But if so, then you should not have been liable for UPL violations by a state with respect to advice on federal matters.
And btw, if both parties receiving and giving advice aren't in a US state, state law has no jurisdiction whatsoever.
Or maybe there is a constitutional issue that state law can not preempt and regulate the practice of law for federal matters? But if so, then you should not have been liable for UPL violations by a state with respect to advice on federal matters.
And btw, if both parties receiving and giving advice aren't in a US state, state law has no jurisdiction whatsoever.
Do note the FIRST paragraph:
I thought I'd post this for the benefit of the Board. Lately, I have been reading some posts from non-lawyers that clearly are proffering specific legal advice. This is something even lawyers are usually very careful of, especially on a forum like this. I would think non-lawyers would be even more careful given potential criminal consequences. Sometimes it is a blurry line between general advice vs. specific legal advice but boy I've seen some whoppers on here lately.
An analogy may be made to the Supreme Court's struggle with pornography law in the 60's & 70's. In the famous Jacobellis v Ohio case, Justice Potter Stewart famously despaired in a concurrence of ever making clarifying a blurry line -- but "I know it when I see it."
The "old timers" in these forums know that UPL is a sensitive topic and the etiquette here doesn't really allow for individual accusations.
A further analogy may be made to the "AOS from VWT" issue in the marriage based forums. In the life of this forum and its predecessors -- there has been no change in the statutes or regulations. Back in the day, there was advice on "clean entries," the "30/60 rule" and "the government forgives the overstay" -- it moved to the "10-foot pole" -- and today it is "BAD MOVE."
Susan's post is simply a warning.
Oct 8th 2010, 11:16 pm
#8
Septicity
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 23,762
Re: Unauthorized Practice of Law
You've presumably got access to Lexis and West. Go and find us a case with a similar fact pattern to your accusation and I'll take you seriously. (And this time, do try and cite it properly!)
Otherwise, you're just blowing hot air.
Oct 8th 2010, 11:54 pm
#9
Peace onion
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: Denver
Posts: 5,686
Re: Unauthorized Practice of Law
CAVEAT - All this can be argued and I'm not going to engage in a long colloquoy about stare decisis, inter- vs. intra-circuit applicability, blah blah blah. I'll leave that to the erudite pedagogues here.
Last edited by Octang Frye; Oct 9th 2010 at 12:09 am.
Oct 9th 2010, 1:48 am
#10
Peace onion
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: Denver
Posts: 5,686
Re: Unauthorized Practice of Law
Well, seeing as you're relatively new here, I'll tell you about the time I was publicly accused - individually - of anti-Semitism, by a user on these forums.
He was before your time, but this folinskyinla character was quite hubristic.
He doesn't seem to post here any more.
No advice given nor intended.
Oct 9th 2010, 2:12 am
#11
Account Closed
Thread Starter
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 119
Re: Unauthorized Practice of Law
The other day I heard a well respected teacher say that before you engage in a discussion in which the parties have differing opinions, you must first ask yourself whether or not the parties have a genuine interest in productive discourse. If not, no amount of logic or reason will ameliorate the anger, vitriol and ultimately the glee with which someone attacks.
I think this is, for the most part, a forum in which people (lawyers, teachers, doctors, electricians, whatever) share their opinions and experiences-- hopefully, to try to help other expats out. My posting was intended to alert people who may be giving specific legal advice that there may be some consequences to doing so-- consequences they were unaware of. There was and is no hidden agenda on my part. I believe one of the rather amusing motives attributed to this posting included that I was taking a somewhat Napoleonic interest in overtaking the Expats forums (that one made me chuckle - anyone who knows the breadth of this forum knows that is a physical impossibillity).
It's much less stressful to go through life assuming the best in people vs. the worst. If you always assume the very worst in people, you will always be very angry. But, then again, some people like wallowing in anger and vitriol and I guess the web is an easy place to be like that. And, I suppose no matter what I post, if someone has decided to engage in negativity for sport while hiding behind a pseudonym and isp, there is no countering that with reason or logic.
How about this for some valuable free advice:
"Protect yourselves from Muslim vampires by rubbing pork sausage on your necks." -a la Stephen Colbert
Now, before you go off on me for criticizing Muslim vampires, it's SATIRE.
Enjoy your weekend and don't be so angry.
Life is too short.
I think this is, for the most part, a forum in which people (lawyers, teachers, doctors, electricians, whatever) share their opinions and experiences-- hopefully, to try to help other expats out. My posting was intended to alert people who may be giving specific legal advice that there may be some consequences to doing so-- consequences they were unaware of. There was and is no hidden agenda on my part. I believe one of the rather amusing motives attributed to this posting included that I was taking a somewhat Napoleonic interest in overtaking the Expats forums (that one made me chuckle - anyone who knows the breadth of this forum knows that is a physical impossibillity).
It's much less stressful to go through life assuming the best in people vs. the worst. If you always assume the very worst in people, you will always be very angry. But, then again, some people like wallowing in anger and vitriol and I guess the web is an easy place to be like that. And, I suppose no matter what I post, if someone has decided to engage in negativity for sport while hiding behind a pseudonym and isp, there is no countering that with reason or logic.
How about this for some valuable free advice:
"Protect yourselves from Muslim vampires by rubbing pork sausage on your necks." -a la Stephen Colbert
Now, before you go off on me for criticizing Muslim vampires, it's SATIRE.
Enjoy your weekend and don't be so angry.
Life is too short.
Oct 9th 2010, 2:25 am
#12
Peace onion
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: Denver
Posts: 5,686
Re: Unauthorized Practice of Law
The other day I heard a well respected teacher say that before you engage in a discussion in which the parties have differing opinions, you must first ask yourself whether or not the parties have a genuine interest in productive discourse. If not, no amount of logic or reason will ameliorate the anger, vitriol and ultimately the glee with which someone attacks.
I think this is, for the most part, a forum in which people (lawyers, teachers, doctors, electricians, whatever) share their opinions and experiences-- hopefully, to try to help other expats out. My posting was intended to alert people who may be giving specific legal advice that there may be some consequences to doing so-- consequences they were unaware of. There was and is no hidden agenda on my part. I believe one of the rather amusing motives attributed to this posting included that I was taking a somewhat Napoleonic interest in overtaking the Expats forums (that one made me chuckle - anyone who knows the breadth of this forum knows that is a physical impossibillity).
It's much less stressful to go through life assuming the best in people vs. the worst. If you always assume the very worst in people, you will always be very angry. But, then again, some people like wallowing in anger and vitriol and I guess the web is an easy place to be like that. And, I suppose no matter what I post, if someone has decided to engage in negativity for sport while hiding behind a pseudonym and isp, there is no countering that with reason or logic.
How about this for some valuable free advice:
"Protect yourselves from Muslim vampires by rubbing pork sausage on your necks." -a la Stephen Colbert
Now, before you go off on me for criticizing Muslim vampires, it's SATIRE.
Enjoy your weekend and don't be so angry. Life is too short.
I think this is, for the most part, a forum in which people (lawyers, teachers, doctors, electricians, whatever) share their opinions and experiences-- hopefully, to try to help other expats out. My posting was intended to alert people who may be giving specific legal advice that there may be some consequences to doing so-- consequences they were unaware of. There was and is no hidden agenda on my part. I believe one of the rather amusing motives attributed to this posting included that I was taking a somewhat Napoleonic interest in overtaking the Expats forums (that one made me chuckle - anyone who knows the breadth of this forum knows that is a physical impossibillity).
It's much less stressful to go through life assuming the best in people vs. the worst. If you always assume the very worst in people, you will always be very angry. But, then again, some people like wallowing in anger and vitriol and I guess the web is an easy place to be like that. And, I suppose no matter what I post, if someone has decided to engage in negativity for sport while hiding behind a pseudonym and isp, there is no countering that with reason or logic.
How about this for some valuable free advice:
"Protect yourselves from Muslim vampires by rubbing pork sausage on your necks." -a la Stephen Colbert
Now, before you go off on me for criticizing Muslim vampires, it's SATIRE.
Enjoy your weekend and don't be so angry.
Life is too short.So are you going to give some examples of the "whoppers", or just deflect?
Waits patiently...
\ Electrician.
\\ Ped-o-gogue
Oct 9th 2010, 2:27 am
#13
Account Closed
Thread Starter
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 119
Re: Unauthorized Practice of Law
Too bad for this forum that more good immigration lawyers like Mr. Folinsky are not posting on here. 
He is so well regarded that he is often consulted by other immigration attorneys. He also has many, many years of experience. These are the kinds of people who, if they felt welcome here, or, at least not constantly under sophomoric attack, would be extraordinarily valuable contributors-- good lawyers willing to post on a public forum for free.
No, I don't know Mr. Folinsky personally - I know him by reputation within our community.
I returned to posting here very recently hoping that things had changed and that moderation was either being self regulated, or enforced by the "official moderators." I'm afraid, however, that not much has changed and that it appears the vitriol against lawyers has actually gotten worse.
That really is too bad. Soon, no reputable lawyer, will post on here and this will become just another Internet site with bad immigration advice from "net-arios." Well, that means more business for people like Mr. Folinsky and me but that's not very good for the people who take and apply the bad advice to a bad end. Ah, well.
He is so well regarded that he is often consulted by other immigration attorneys. He also has many, many years of experience. These are the kinds of people who, if they felt welcome here, or, at least not constantly under sophomoric attack, would be extraordinarily valuable contributors-- good lawyers willing to post on a public forum for free.
No, I don't know Mr. Folinsky personally - I know him by reputation within our community.
I returned to posting here very recently hoping that things had changed and that moderation was either being self regulated, or enforced by the "official moderators." I'm afraid, however, that not much has changed and that it appears the vitriol against lawyers has actually gotten worse.
That really is too bad. Soon, no reputable lawyer, will post on here and this will become just another Internet site with bad immigration advice from "net-arios." Well, that means more business for people like Mr. Folinsky and me but that's not very good for the people who take and apply the bad advice to a bad end. Ah, well.
Oct 9th 2010, 2:28 am
#14
Peace onion
Joined: Jul 2006
Location: Denver
Posts: 5,686
Re: Unauthorized Practice of Law
Snicker. That was quite manipulative. I'm sure you'll succeed in your attempts to get me censured. Frankly, I'm not overly concerned.
Better things to do. 'Night
Actually, I will say some one final thing. You come in here, slag people off, and then refuse to back it up. For shame, ma'am. For shame.
Better things to do. 'NightActually, I will say some one final thing. You come in here, slag people off, and then refuse to back it up. For shame, ma'am. For shame.
Last edited by Octang Frye; Oct 9th 2010 at 2:31 am.
Oct 9th 2010, 2:46 am
#15
Septicity
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 23,762
Re: Unauthorized Practice of Law
Too bad for this forum that more good immigration lawyers like Mr. Folinsky are not posting on here.
He is so well regarded that he is often consulted by other immigration attorneys. He also has many, many years of experience. These are the kinds of people who, if they felt welcome here, or, at least not constantly under sophomoric attack, would be extraordinarily valuable contributors-- good lawyers willing to post on a public forum for free.
No, I don't know Mr. Folinsky personally - I know him by reputation within our community.
I returned to posting here very recently hoping that things had changed and that moderation was either being self regulated, or enforced by the "official moderators." I'm afraid, however, that not much has changed and that it appears the vitriol against lawyers has actually gotten worse.
That really is too bad. Soon, no reputable lawyer, will post on here and this will become just another Internet site with bad immigration advice from "net-arios." Well, that means more business for people like Mr. Folinsky and me but that's not very good for the people who take and apply the bad advice to a bad end. Ah, well.
He is so well regarded that he is often consulted by other immigration attorneys. He also has many, many years of experience. These are the kinds of people who, if they felt welcome here, or, at least not constantly under sophomoric attack, would be extraordinarily valuable contributors-- good lawyers willing to post on a public forum for free.
No, I don't know Mr. Folinsky personally - I know him by reputation within our community.
I returned to posting here very recently hoping that things had changed and that moderation was either being self regulated, or enforced by the "official moderators." I'm afraid, however, that not much has changed and that it appears the vitriol against lawyers has actually gotten worse.
That really is too bad. Soon, no reputable lawyer, will post on here and this will become just another Internet site with bad immigration advice from "net-arios." Well, that means more business for people like Mr. Folinsky and me but that's not very good for the people who take and apply the bad advice to a bad end. Ah, well.
You appear in a new community, advertise your business, start accusing folks of crimes, belittle their freely-given contributions to others, and then claim to be offended by it all?
Don't let the door hit you on the way out.