Law Assignment #2 Professional Responsibility & Legal Ethics

Law Assignment #2 Professional Responsibility & Legal Ethics

Case Assignment

Issue

The main issue in this case is that whether under the law of Ohio, Mary can sue Dan based on his unauthorized practice of law, as Dan guaranteed Mary, on the basis incorrect knowledge of law. Dan did not commit fraud or misrepresent, but on the basis of false knowledge of law he made a statement due to which Mary suffered huge loss.

Rule

Under law of Ohio, a person who is not licensed to practice law, shall not hold out as attorney at all, no one is allowed to represent any attorney orally or written, and third and the most important aspect is that if a person commits any act which is not allowed under the law of Ohio, will b considered as violating this law under RC. § 4705.07 (A) 1-3. It is further provided that any such person is not allowed to practice law directly, indirectly or representing any attorney as being an authorized to person of law. The term attorney is defined under Ohio law as a person who holds license to practice law and must not be under the category of authorized person to practice law RC. § 4705.07 (B) 1.

There was no such rule in the beginning, but after Crawford v. First Merit Mortgage Corp, when a home owner received damage due to the involvement of Mortgage Company in the unauthorized law practices, this law revised. On the basis of this, a non attorney was entailed to pay the damages for the losses suffered by other person. Plaintiff Gary received damages from the mortgage company. It was then the Ohio Supreme Court's Board evolved law on the basis of this unautho0rised practice of law with the amendments in Revised Code ...