Legal Opinion

Doe v. Condon

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided June 5, 2000No. 25138PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

Petitioner sought to have the Court accept this matter in its original jurisdiction to determine whether certain tasks performed by a non-attorney employee in a law firm constitute the unauthorized practice of law. Specifically, petitioner asks (1) whether it is the unauthorized practice of law for a paralegal employed by an attorney to conduct informational seminars for the general public on wills and trusts without the attorney being present; (2) whether it is the unauthorized practice of law for a paralegal employed by an attorney to meet with clients privately at the attorney’s office,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. State v. Buyers Service Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1987
  2. In Re Unauthorized Practice of Law RulesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1992
  3. In Re Mid-America Living Trust Associates, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1996
  4. State v. DespainSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1995
  5. Oregon State Bar v. John H. Miller Formerly Executive Estate Planners, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1963

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hatleberg v. Norwest Bank WisconsinCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2004
  2. Bolen v. Crowe (In Re Holmes)District Court, N.D. Mississippi · 2004
  3. In re DeddishSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2001
  4. South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP v. WilsonDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2023

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API