In some, if not all jurisdictional settings, the power to exercise or practice unauthorised law is a punishable offense. In many states, the revised codes and rules prohibit the use of attorney privileges if the Supreme Court has not acknowledged one’s attorney role. This means that; the use of oral, written, unwritten, or advertisement to suggest that one considers themselves an attorney of the law is liable for punishment. Paralegals act as firm researchers and by no means should they advise, act, or conduct any practice in the name of the attorneys in the firm. In so doing, they are making the firm liable for a civil action that may render the firm incapable of continuing its services. The bar concerned with legal matters can, therefore, disbar the firm or suspend the lawyers from practicing law (Cannon, 2008).
Issue
The issue that arises in this case is the liability that Dan faces for the information he gave Mary. Mary wants to sue Dan for unauthorised practice of the law. This is because; the advice Dan gave Mary on her loan payments made Mary suffer. This was after she defaulted on her loan payments, which later affected her personal credit. Dan had promised that that would not happen under their current Ohio laws. Mary’s reliance on this information meant that she would have taken any information, and tried to make the situation play in her favour.
Rule
In Mary’s case, however, a lawsuit cannot be brought against Dan. This is for providing the information on the results of Mary’s loan, should she default. Dan did not represent himself as a legal counsel to Mary. He merely told Mary about the Ohio state laws as he knew them. He was not pretending to be a legal counsel on Mary’s loan issue, nor did he present himself as a practicing attorney of the law. Mary can bring the civil action against the bank in which Dan works from, but cannot sue Dan for unauthorised practice of the law. It is evident from Joe’s explanation that a lawsuit cannot be brought against someone who practices unauthorised law (Sandler, McGinn & Klubes, 2001).
Analysis
The above case may bring any researcher to the realisation that, it is not possible to sue Dan for any results of the information he might have provided. Dan was not a hired attorney for Mary, which means he did not represent her in any legal action. He simply passed on information, which according to him, was true and in accordance with the law. It is safe to assume that Dan, under no circumstance, provided Mary with the idea of representation in any legal issue, it was a simple case of credit advice.
Conclusion
Mary has no liable lawsuit to bring against Dan. The advice given to her did not warrant any unauthorised practice of the law, and even if it did, she cannot sue for the things Dan told her. Anyone else would have told her this, and what she decided to do with the information would be her choice. She cannot blame Dan for the misfortune she happens to face after failing to repay her loan. She was sure of the consequences of failing to pay her payments; she should have looked for legal opinion on what to do if she failed to pay her payments. The credit advice Dan offered does not warrant any lawsuit in a court of law (Sandler, McGinn & Klubes, 2001).
The Ohio decision for such a case may be based solely on the evidence found to indicate there was unauthorised practice of law. The respondent, Dan in this case, will have a chance to answer the complaint filed by Mary. After the hearing, the Board responsible may dismiss the matter, or take it to the disciplinary committee (Cannon, 2008). In this case, since there is no proof of any unauthorised practice of law, there is no need for the Ohio Supreme Court to get involved. The case may, therefore, be dismissed for lack of sufficient evidence. This is under Rule VII of the Supreme Court Rules. This is for the Government of the Bar of Ohio that governs unauthorised practice of law proceedings. The Supreme Court’s jurisdiction comes from Article IV, Section 2(B)(1)(g).
References
Cannon, T. A. (2008). Ethics and professional responsibility for paralegals. New York: Aspen Publishers.
Sandler, A. L., McGinn, S. E., & Klubes, B. B. (2001). Consumer financial services. New York: Free Press.
