Thursday, August 11, 2011

Around The Ethicsphere: Reproductive Law Classes at SPU Cancelled, Arizona Ethics Law May Spell "Oops"

It's been a busy day here in the ethicsphere. So let's get right to it.

Students registered at Solo Practice University (SPU) for the "Creating a Niche in Reproductive Law," will have some extra time on their hands as, well, the professor is no longer teaching there. Here is her SPU bio, uh oh, page not found. It was only in December of 2008 that "it was announced that theresa m. erickson would be joining the prestigious faculty at Solo Practice University."

So students may want to consider the class on blogging that was announced in November 2008. Oh wait, that professor was disbarred 3 months before the announcement, so that's not an option.

Anyway, on to the next issue of the day.

You may remember my post from yesterday where I mentioned one Rachel Rodgers practicing with her New York and New Jersey License from her home in Arizona. Lisa Solomon swooped in to accuse me of libel, and now Matt Brown, in Arizona, may have cleared up this whole thing for us:

You see, Ms. Rodgers lists a Phoenix, Arizona address on her website. She offers services that look like legal services. Ms. Rodgers is not a licensed Arizona attorney. I checked. She never explicitly claims to be licensed in Arizona, but she also never offers any kind of disclaimer clearly explaining that she isn’t licensed here. That wouldn’t matter anyway, as I’ll explain in a second. The of-counsel lawyer listed on her website, Donna Seyle, is not a licensed Arizona attorney either

An out-of-state lawyer, not admitted to practice in Arizona but living in Arizona, may not practice law limited to the law of jurisdictions in which he is licensed. The out-of-state lawyer may not perform the practice of law in an Arizona office of record, either the office of the out-of-state lawyer or an admitted Arizona attorney.


Well, it's been a fun day in the ethicsphere folks. Of course as soon as the parties involved here, or the vast amount of Starbucks lawyers who think I'm mean and support any lawyer who tries to make a go of it on the internet (either as a practitioner or host of an online university) make some statement, I'll be sure to pass it along.

As soon as it happens.

The minute they say something.

Any minute now...

Wait for it...

Non-anonymous comments welcome. Located in Miami, Florida, Brian Tannebaum practices Bar Admission and Discipline and Criminal Defense. He is the author of I Got A Bar Complaint.Share/Save/Bookmark


Ken said...

You older lawyers are always using the word "ethics" as a weapon, but the truth is that you simply don't appreciate the nuances of modern practices like baby-selling or practicing law without the necessary license. Why do you hate young people?

unfrozenlawyer said...

Well, you know Mr. Tannebaum, times are tough all over.

IVF Land on Surrogacy World said...

I have a question for you regarding the baby selling lawyers Theresa Erickson and Hilary Neiman.

In many cases Hilary who is only licensed to practice law in the State of Maryland would do contract reviews for surrogates or Intended Parents that live all over the country and would then deliver in California.

Both of these lawyers have been doing this for years regardless of them baby selling charges.

For example, the Intended Parents are from Washington and represented by Theresa Erickson in California while the Surrogate is in Nebraska and represented by Hilary Neiman in Maryland. The contract is written under California law and the only time the Intended Parents and Surrogate are actually in California is for the birth.

What are the penalties or ethical issues with the unathorized practice of the law when they represent someone that is only in California for the end of the pregnancy.

What is the proper ethical and legal way to set-up this arrangement?