Legal Opinion · Dissent

American Abstract and Title Co. v. Rice

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided June 17, 2004No. 03-754Published

1DissentRay Thornton, Justice

Because I believe that stice, laws of this state vest in the Supreme Court the duty and authority to regulate the practice of law and to prohibit the unauthorized practice of law,” and because the court adopted a rule creating a Committee on the Unauthorized Practice of Law delegating to that committee authority over “all complaints of and matters or inquiries dealing with the unauthorized practice of law,”11 respectfully dissent.

While the duty and authority to regulate the practice of law is inherent in our 1874 Constitution, it is specifically set out in Amendment 28 to the Constitution.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. McKenzie v. BurrisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1973
  2. Ark. Bar Assn. v. BlockSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1959
  3. Sexton v. Arkansas Supreme Court Committee on Professional ConductSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1989
  4. In Re Petition of AndersonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1993
  5. Creekmore v. IzardSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1963

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

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

Powered by the Exa API