Unauthorized practice of law

Disciplinary Commission overreached, justices agree

November 30, 2012
Dave Stafford
An Ohio attorney who argued his disciplinary case in a rare public forum before the Indiana Supreme Court prevailed as justices said the Indiana Disciplinary Commission’s arguments failed.
More

Attorney discipline process goes public

November 7, 2012
Dave Stafford
Testimony alleges that Ohio lawyer’s race and past play a role in Indiana’s case against him for unauthorized practice of law.
More

Justices adopt repayment plan in UPL case

January 23, 2012
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court has adopted a repayment plan for an Indianapolis company it found engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, ordering officials to reimburse the state bar association and former clients during the next six years.
More

Order requires United Financial to pay court costs

January 17, 2012
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court has ordered United Financial Systems Corp. and its officials to pay the court and a special master $16,003 for the costs associated with an Unauthorized Practice of Law action that has been ongoing for more than three years.
 
More

Adding UPL to Indiana RICO statute

November 9, 2011
Michael Hoskins
An Indiana Supreme Court case involving an estate planning “trust mill” has led to a policy discussion about whether certain types of unauthorized practice of law should rise above a misdemeanor crime and involve a racketeering component.
More

Legislative study committee to discuss UPL

October 10, 2011
Jennifer Nelson
The Indiana Probate Code Study Commission, which meets for the first time this year on Wednesday, will focus on three items at its meeting, including the unauthorized practice of law.
More

UPL victims urged to claim refunds

August 5, 2011
IL Staff
The Office of the Indiana Attorney General is asking the victims of the United Financial Systems unauthorized practice of law case to apply soon if they want to receive restitution.
More

'Notario' pleads guilty to tax evasion, illegal law practice

July 28, 2011
Michael Hoskins
A Marion Superior judge has sentenced an Indianapolis woman who offered illegal immigration services without a law license and evaded paying her income taxes through that business.
More

Class action alleges UPLRestricted Content

July 20, 2011
Michael Hoskins
The plaintiffs' lawyers will use the United Financial decision from the Indiana Supreme Court to make their argument.
More

Hearing set for UPL case

June 8, 2011
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court won’t reconsider its 2010 decision ordering United Financial Systems Corp. to refund money for estate planning services it sold, constituting an unauthorized practice of law.
More

Company hit with class action suits

April 13, 2011
Michael Hoskins
Two class action lawsuits have been filed against an Indianapolis firm that had offered estate planning services to people. Now, the Indiana Supreme Court is considering what happens next against the company it found a year ago had engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.
More

Notario publico issues surface again

March 30, 2011
Michael Hoskins
Years ago, the Indiana Supreme Court made it clear what non-lawyers could and could not do related to immigration services. Crossing the line might be considered the unauthorized practice of law. Now, two people in Indiana are facing the consequences of doing exactly that.
More

AG files criminal UPL, tax evasion charges against ‘notario publico’

March 25, 2011
Michael Hoskins
Adding to what it has already done in targeting two “notario publicos” for illegally offering immigration services, the Indiana Attorney General’s Office has now filed a criminal Unauthorized Practice of Law charge and several tax evasion counts against one of those non-lawyers who was operating in Indianapolis.
More

Law firm files class-action lawsuit for estate planning UPL

January 25, 2011
Michael Hoskins
A Logansport law firm has filed a class-action lawsuit against an Indianapolis company that the state’s highest court last year determined engaged in the Unauthorized Practice of Law, suing on behalf of thousands of residents for what attorneys estimate could be $10 million to $20 million in damages.
More

Justices order refunds in estate planning UPL case

December 22, 2010
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court is shaking its proverbial finger at a company it found had engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, making it clear that the court’s orders must be followed or non-compliant litigants will be sanctioned.
More

SCOTUS won't take Indiana UPL case

October 13, 2010
Michael Hoskins
The Supreme Court of the United States won’t reconsider a significant unauthorized practice of law case ruled on by the Indiana Supreme Court earlier this year.
More

Justices rule on trust mill UPL case

April 14, 2010
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana State Bar Association has won an unauthorized practice of law action against an estate planning services company, but wasn't able to completely sway the state's highest court that all "costs and expenses" should be completely granted for the prosecution of the case.
More

Court issues UPL ruling about 'general counsel'Restricted Content

March 31, 2010
Scott Olson
A top executive of Celadon Group Inc. can no longer represent himself as the Indianapolis-based trucking company's attorney because of a glaring omission - he is not licensed to practice law in Indiana.
More

Agencies examine UPLRestricted Content

March 17, 2010
Michael Hoskins
Long before he became Greenwood's police chief, attorney Joe Pitcher recalls sitting as a special judge in town court and facing an Unauthorized Practice of Law case that may be one of few like it in Indiana.
More

Report issued in UPL claim on trust mill case

July 15, 2009
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana Supreme Court has never determined whether the money spent during the prosecution of an Unauthorized Practice of Law claim fits into the "costs and expenses incurred by such a hearing" category, which means that a losing party pays under Administrative Disciplinary Rule 24.
More

Justices consider 'costs' in UPL action

January 1, 2009
Michael Hoskins
The Indiana State Bar Association wants the state's highest court to define the term "costs and expenses" as it's never done before, and in doing so order a company being prosecuted for the Unauthorized Practice of Law to have to pay those fees and disgorge any profits it shouldn't have made in the first place.Hearing arguments today in State of Indiana, Ex. Rel. Indiana State Bar Association v. United Financial Systems Corp., No. 84S00-0810-MS-551, justices considered an issue of first...
More
Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  2. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  3. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  4. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

  5. You can put your photos anywhere you like... When someone steals it they know it doesn't belong to them. And, a man getting a divorce is automatically not a nice guy...? That's ridiculous. Since when is need of money a conflict of interest? That would mean that no one should have a job unless they are already financially solvent without a job... A photographer is also under no obligation to use a watermark (again, people know when a photo doesn't belong to them) or provide contact information. Hey, he didn't make it easy for me to pay him so I'll just take it! Well heck, might as well walk out of the grocery store with a cart full of food because the lines are too long and you don't find that convenient. "Only in Indiana." Oh, now you're passing judgement on an entire state... What state do you live in? I need to characterize everyone in your state as ignorant and opinionated. And the final bit of ignorance; assuming a photo anyone would want is lucky and then how much does your camera have to cost to make it a good photo, in your obviously relevant opinion?

ADVERTISEMENT