Power Grab

[Smalso]

The American Bar Association seriously thinks that no one in the country should be allowed to provide any sort of legal advice to anyone unless they're a Bar-certified attorney.



http://www.StellaAwards.com/powergrab.html

[ceo_esq]

Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered. - Luke 11:52

With due respect for St. Luke, there are very good reasons why “no one in the country should be allowed to provide any sort of legal advice to anyone unless they're a Bar-certified attorney.” (I’ll qualify this observation by noting that judges interpreting “unauthorized practice of law” statutes have generally applied a good, common-sense definition of legal advice that safeguards accountants, real estate title companies, insurance claims adjusters, and the like from unwarranted prosecution.) It is extremely bad public policy to encourage the practice of law by nonlawyers, just as it’s bad policy to allow nondoctors to make medical diagnoses and prescribe treatments.

Attorneys are specially trained to comprehend the legal effect of words and conduct. Suppressing the unauthorized practice of law protects you against the perils of legal representation and advice by persons not trained, tested and licensed for such work.

Attorneys are also subject to special legal and ethical rules regarding client confidentiality, conflicts of interest and so forth. Only members of the bar are subject to discipline when they violate these rules. If you’re getting legal advice from a nonlawyer, you’re not getting the benefit of these safeguards and the bar cannot monitor or control the quality of advice you receive.

All in all, there is a great danger to the public posed by people who present themselves as capable of exercising legal judgment but lack the necessary expertise and training to analyze legal problems. A person’s property, reputation, secrets, family relations, freedom or life could be at stake.

In the interest of disclosure, I'm an attorney, but not one whose practice could conceivably be threatened by competition from nonlawyers. I still favor strong rules against unauthorized legal practice, and don't consider them to be a "power grab".

[Smalso]

For the record, I am one of the apparently shrinking number of people who like lawyers and consider them necessary--and not a necessary evil, either.

[Bearguin]

Hey. Lots go to homeopaths for medical advice, why not let people hang a holistic legal advice sign and give whatever kind of advice they want?

(Hint because it's a dumb idea for the medical world).

[swellman]

from the article
Attorneys already dominate the legal system. Most legislators are lawyers. Most judges are lawyers.

Don't mean to hijack this thread, but is it true that most legislators are lawyers? I know that many of them are, but this statement makes it sounds as if Congress is just a big clubby collection of connected lawyers. Hey, wait a minute...:(

Actually, the last line in the quote is what caught my eye. I guess it's true one does not have to be a lawyer to become a judge, but how common is the practice? Here in Massachusetts, judges are appointed, and I know of no non-attorney judges. Is it common to elect non-lawyers as judge in states that elect judges?

BTW, I agree with Smalso. I know and like lawyers, hire them when appropriate (real estate, advice in delicate situations, etc.) Plus they know all the best lawyer jokes.

[corplinx]

This plays into the hands of the law schools. Remember, you cant self study for the bar.

[DrBenway]

A story:

I evaluated a woman who had become manic shortly after starting treatment on Prozac. She wasn't sleeping, felt very restless, felt her thoughts were racing, and had difficulty making decisions. Her sixteen year old daughter recommended they go down the street to a car dealership, "just to look around." The daughter had recently got her drivers license and was eager to get a car of her own.

At the dealership, somehow, the mother was persuaded to trade in her car, her husband's car (which she does not own), for two brand new cars costing far more than the family can afford. When she drove the cars home with her daughter, her husband was aghast. "What were you thinking??" he demanded. The woman immediately took the cars back to the lot, only a mile or so away.

The dealership refused to take the cars back.

I saw this woman a couple of days after the event. She was still manic. I wrote a letter to the dealership explaining that the woman was suffering from a mental disorder, triggered by a trial with Prozac, which impaired her judgment. In my opinion, she wasn't competent to engage in a serious financial contract in her present mental state, and by history, in her mental state upon the day she bought the cars.

As evidence of her impaired judgment, I said, "I doubt it's legal to sell a car one doesn't own."

The case went to court.

When I was deposed, the attorney for the dealership referenced my letter, and asked, "Doctor, are you an attorney?"

I said, "No."

He said, "Do you consider yourself competent to render legal opinions?"

I said, "Uhh, no, I guess not."

After the deposition, I thought, "Wait a sec. You don't have to go to law school to know you can't sell a car you don't own!"

In court, the opposing attorney asked again if I felt competent to render legal opinions. This time, I wasn't so cowered. I said, "Ordinary citizens have to have a basic awareness of what's legal and illegal. As an ordinary citizen, I know you can't sell things you don't own."

Happily for my patient, the court ruled in her favor. The dealership took the cars back.

I hope the day never comes when ordinary citizens are unable to make basic decisions about what's legal or illegal.

[Dancing David]

Well, my two pennies.
If this was the case then there would be no one helping victims of domestic violence to get orders of protection.

However our legal advocates do not give 'legal advice', they can discuss OP law and how to manuver it court, but they can't discuss outcomes or state how something should turn out. We reccomend that our clients seek out an attorney when it comes to child custody and property rights.

If you have dealings with the court, esp. in real estate: get a lawyer!

Peace
dancing David

[Smalso]

DrBenway:
I hope the day never comes when ordinary citizens are unable to make basic decisions about what's legal or illegal.

Yup!

Dancing David:
If you have dealings with the court, esp. in real estate: get a lawyer!

If you have any dealings in real estate without a lawyer, you may wind up wishing you'd had one. Ever bought a house? Remember how the real estate agent shoves about a ream of papers toward you and you get writer's cramp signing them. I asked what all this was and the agent said that it was all routine stuff, not really inportant. My question was, if they're not really important, why do I have to sign them? If you are able to understand all the lingo in those papers, be my guest. Just keep in mind that it was a lawyer who drew those papers up. For me, I hired a lawyer to read over them and tell me exactly what it was I was getting into.

[Richard G]

If I want to represent myself, [my right] I'm going to do it. Money grubbing attorneys can take a hike.

[Smalso]

According to the link, the ABA proposal would not prohibit self-representation. There is a word for those who representated themselves in criminal procedings: inmates.

[ceo_esq]

Originally posted by Smalso
According to the link, the ABA proposal would not prohibit self-representation. There is a word for those who representated themselves in criminal procedings: inmates.
Even attorneys have to resist the temptation to represent themselves. There's a saying: "The lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client."

[Smalso]

Originally posted by ceo_esq

Even attorneys have to resist the temptation to represent themselves. There's a saying: "The lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client."

Aside from that, most of them can't afford their own fee.:D