Legal Opinion

Doe v. Condon

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided August 5, 2002No. 25508PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Burnett

John Doe (“Doe”), a lawyer, petitioned this Court in its original jurisdiction to determine whether his business association with a lender bank (“Lender”) and a title insurance company (“Title Company”) constitutes the unauthorized practice of law in violation of Rule 5.5(b), SCACR. 1 This Court granted the petition to provide declaratory judgment and appointed the Honorable Edward B. Cottingham as referee. We conclude Doe’s business association, when conducted as herein below prescribed, is proper.

FACTS

The parties have stipulated Lender contacted Doe to supervise the execution and…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. In Re DuncanSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1909
  2. State Bar of Arizona v. Arizona Land Title & Trust Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1961
  3. State v. Buyers Service Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1987
  4. In Re Unauthorized Practice of Law RulesSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1992
  5. State Bar of Arizona v. Arizona Land Title & Trust Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1962

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Housing Authority v. KeySupreme Court of South Carolina · 2002
  2. In Re PstrakSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2004
  3. In Re PincelliSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API