The other day as I was walking through my local supermarket, I overheard a conversation between a group of about 4-5 people. No, I wasn't eavesdropping - these people weren't whispering. Rather, they were loud and boisterous enough so that everyone inside of 50 feet could hear them.
Anyway, the gist of the conversation was one Person had just been informed that they were about to be sued because some kid in the neighborhood had fallen and injured themselves on their property and now the kids' parents were threatening to sue for their kid's injuries. Person was consequently seeking advice on how to protect themself.
We all clear on what's what?
Friend #1 suggests they hire an attorney. Friend 2 says no - that's too expensive. Friend 3 claims he knows what to do but that Person can't tell anyone he (Friend 3) told him but..... Turns out Friend 3 was either a paralegal or he dropped out of law school - I couldn't tell which. Anyway, Friend 3 proceeds to tell Person what all he needs to do to protect himself quoting statues like scripture and what forms to use and all that. It was quite involved.
The problem is that what Friend was doing was providing legal advice. Specifically, Friend 3 was engaging in the unlawful practice of law (UPL) and lawyers really hate that because, well...if for no other reason, it invites competition in an already tight market. The other problem that most people don't realize is that while attorneys carry Error and Omissions Insurance, regular people off the street (like Friend 3) often do not.
This is important for no other reason, than if Friend 3 were to give bad advice and Person relied on the advice to their detriment, Person would have no (or little) recourse if said advice were to be incorrect. Yes, Person could try to sue Friend 3 but then it's a he said she said thing and that rarely goes over well. I mean, I'd like to see Person go after Friend 3 years after that conversation. Imagine trying to prove that that discussion ever happened and do you really think the other people in that group are going to admit to anything?!?
Yeah, no. Well, probably no, they are not.
Having grown up on California law for a couple of decades, I know that in California, UPL is a going-to-jail sort of crime. Specifically, under California Business and Professions Code (BPC) section 6126, UPL occurs when someone who is not a licensed attorney provides legal services or advises clients on legal matters and is punishable for up to 6 months in jail. As it turns out, many other states also hold that UPL is a criminal act and such actions are referred to the District Attorney.
Important to note, however, is that in Utah (where the above noted conversation took place), UPL is NOT a crime (and it's not a crime in other states - so, you gotta check your state to see what's what).
That said, while UPL in Utah is not a crime, it is a violation that can lead to civil consequences under title 78A (specifically, 78A-9-103) of the Utah code. Persons who receive UPL in Utah and/or believe someone has provided UPL can file a complaint with the Utah State Bar. Soooooo, maybe Friend 3 might be on the hook if things go south with Person and Person wants to recoup some of their losses from Friend 3.
I think the bottom line to all this is that Friend 3 needs to keep their yap shut and not be so specific with their advice.
Well, that and maybe Person should just do some research on their own. Yeah, and maybe Person could visit Nolo.com on how to defend in a personal injury action. Maybe Person could also take a gander at Google Scholar to search case law (not in just any state but in their specific jurisdiction) on personal injury matters involving invitees and/or trespassers (specifically "child trespassers") and, oh, I don't know, just spitballing here....the duty owed to such....or something like that and be on their merry.
Just sayin.
No comments:
Post a Comment