Legal Opinion

Ex Parte Watson

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided December 1, 2003No. 25757PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

Charles M. Watson, Jr., County Attorney for Greenwood County, (“Petitioner”), seeks a declaratory judgment as to whether nonlawyer title abstractors engage in the unauthorized practice of law when they conduct a title search and report the title status in connection with a tax foreclosure sale. We hold that such activities constitute the unauthorized practice of law and must either be conducted or supervised by an attorney.

Factual/Procedural Background

Before selling a property at a tax foreclosure sale, tax collectors must provide notice of the sale to the property owner and any lien holders.…

2Cases cited4 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. Doe v. McMasterSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2003
  4. In Re LesterSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2003

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Slack v. JamesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2005
  2. Boone v. Quicken Loans, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 2017
  3. Slack v. JamesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API