Any Texas Lawyers in the House (or anyone else)? Need advice

by TheClarinetist 81 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Band on the Run

  No. If I knew your actual name, I might report you. Most law students would know that Texas has the greatest interest in this matter. It is not matter what my home state says, it is the law of the state that I am giving advice that controls. What you do is unethical and very imprudent. Maybe when you pay for malpractice insurance you will have more insight.

  People now know my opinion. They are free to choose between off the cuff, unresearched remarks and going for a free consultation from a real lawyer in the actual world. Someone who at one point in time could pass a bar exam in the state, using that state's law rather than black letter common law.
• 

  wha happened?

  Cowboy, thanks for the judgement call.. Apparently calling someone on their intentions is considered ragging. I'll be sure and remember the advice, while I flush the toilette. BTW, I haven't had an eviction in 15 years. Ya know why? Because I screen people fairly well up front and keep communication channels clear. I avoid making bad judgement calls while checking into any problem thoroughly. However when I hear the term, poke holes in it, my very basic understanding skills tell me someone is trying to avoid penalties or responsibilities.

  Be prepared to pay whats fair.
• 

  wha happened?

  Band if u are licensed as u say u are, why not cite the law or statute that specifically states, that offering legal advice in any setting, is illegal outside of what is communicated by an attorney.

  BTW, your argument is vague and imbiguous. By your definition anyone who answered the poster by simply stating, "Get an attorney " is guilty of breaking the law, as they just offered legal advice without passing the bar.

  Now practicing law is another matter.
• 

  SixofNine

  I loves me some internets.
• 

  Band on the Run

  I offered what I could legally - that phrase proves my point. I don't expect people to understand how dangerous it is to offer help. I was repeatly warned, even ordered, and still plowed right ahead. People who are educated and socialized have a higher duty to refrain from harm.

  My duty and moral consience is discharged.
• 

  Cagefighter

  BOTR, I would welcome any lawsuit from you in a heartbeat. Then I would counter sue you for trying to discredit me on this forum in regards to a my experience and information that I MAKE CLEAR IS NOT TO BE TAKEN AS LEGAL ADVICE. You could be guilty of causing me financial harm by doing so.

  My verifiable qualifications:

  Texas Resident and almost 10 years of experience enforcing leases and representing landlords in TX in these matters.I used to own a collection agency, I was never an attorney: I HIRED ATTORNEYS! THEY WORKED FOR ME.

  You sir, could be guilty of discrediting me to cause financial harm, "tortious interference".

  Honestly, I do not believe you are a lawyer. If you are you are not a very busy one, are you?

  Right after you sue me, you should sue another guy named Dave Ramsey. He is on the radio everyday giving advice as well, google him.

  Oh yeah, and read the original posts Theclarinetest was asking for advice from an attorney OR anyone else.

  Furthermore, you seem to be very confused about the difference in giving someone advice and representing someone. There is a huge difference. It's the difference between writing Dear Abby and listing Abigail Van Buren as your attorney.
• 

  Band on the Run

  You don't have the qualifications! Legal information is permissible. Self help law books provide legal information. One could post a link to a standard form lease or a texas statute. What could even quote from a legal treatise what is black letter, common law. When you direct someone to pursue a course of conduct or leave the impression that your reply is sufficient in itself to solve the problem, a line is crossed.

  I make it a point of not researching questions here. My curiosity is piqued but if I researched the answer, I might post it and that would be wrong. One huge factor here is that there was no dialogue on what the facts actually were. People report the facts that they believe are important but other factors may also be going on that are important. A lease is a contract defining the landlord/tenant relationship. But a statute might illuminate the contract by defining terms or other important matters, setting up time limits. The contract may not determine the relationship between the parties if the underlying statute forbids what is contracted. Procedural issues are paramount. As I said earlier, at a minimum, one would have to pour over the contract, research the statute for landlord/tenant law, research how certain contractual issues are solved in Texas, research all the cases interpreting the contract, contract law, and landlord/tenant law.

  It is often far more important to spot potential issues than to know the actual substantive law answer. I never said which posts offered legal advice. Merely referencing a statute would not be advice. If someone looks only in that statute, however, the person you are trying to help has been misled. You don't need to be a lawyer to know the law. Paralegals, legal assistants, contract administrators-- a whole host of people--might know the law better than a lawyer. Many people would like to see a politcal science or history academic on the Supreme Court. Manipulating information and offering advice is wrong.

  I don't know of any forum that allows legal advice to be given. Medical advice is also not allowed. This is becoming tiresome. I lack the firepower to enforce it. Those many mods would enforce it so the site incurs no liability. There is no doubt that the rule boosts monopolies lawyers possess concerning representating someone. Any individual is qualified to represent themselves. In exchange for the monopoly on legal services, actual lawyers are subject to a host of rules and regulations. Malpractice insurance is usually mandatory. I did not devise the system.

  It would be nice to support someone going through a rough time. Certainly is better to err on the side of restraint than offer advice which might harm someone seriously.
• 

  Band on the Run

  I found the unauthorized practice of law provision in the Texas Code. Mozilla will not allow me to copy and paste. IE looks much better. Suffice it to say that the code provision is inadequate. The details are determined by Texas case law. Not simple.
• 

  Cagefighter

  Band on the Run, you need to get a refund on your law school tuition. They forgot to tell the difference between practicing law and having a conversation.

  I am actually very familiar with the State Bar in Here in Texas. If you want to report me just do a whois search on my domain. I am not hiding, are you?

  I used to eat attorneys like you for lunch that try and suppress my first amendment rights of free speech. I can give you a list of attorneys that groan when they hear the name Jonathan Morris. If you want to be the next notch in my belt, I welcome the opportunity. However, there will be some time and travel involved for both of us.

  This is turning into a pissing contest, maybe we should agree to enter binding arbitration in JWN court. Judge Shamus can preside.
• 

  AGuest

  I found the unauthorized practice of law provision in the Texas Code. Mozilla will not allow me to copy and paste. IE looks much better. Suffice it to say that the code provision is inadequate.

  Here, let me help you out, dear BOTR (peace to you!):

  TEXAS STATUTES AND CODES. GOVERNMENT CODE. TITLE 2. JUDICIAL BRANCH. SUBTITLE G. ATTORNEYS. CHAPTER 81. STATE BAR. SUBCHAPTER G. UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW

  81.101. Definition.

  (a) In this chapter the "practice of law" means the preparation of a pleading or other document incident to an action or special proceeding or the management of the action or proceeding on behalf of a client before a judge in court as well as service rendered out of court, including the giving of advice or the rendering of any service requiring the use of legal skill or knowledge, such as preparing a will, contract, or other instrument, the legal effect of which under the facts and conclusions involved must be carefully determined.

  (b) The definition in this section is not exclusive and does not deprive the judicial branch of the power and authority under both this chapter and the adjudicated cases to determine whether other services and acts not enumerated may constitute the practice of law.

  (c) In this chapter, the "practice of law" does not include the design, creation, publication, distribution, display, or sale, including publication, distribution, display, or sale by means of an Internet web site, of written materials, books, forms, computer software, or similar products if the products clearly and conspicuously state that the products are not a substitute for the advice of an attorney. This subsection does not authorize the use of the products or similar media in violation of Chapter 83 and does not affect the applicability or enforceability of that chapter.

  In April 2001, the Texas UPL Task Force recommended changing 81.101 to the following: § 81.101 Definitions

  A. The "practice of law," as used in this chapter, includes

  1. Providing legal representation;

  2. Providing legal advice;

  3. Preparing or negotiating, in whole or in part, a will, trust, contract, conveyance, pleading, or other instrument to the extent such preparation or negotiation is performed or offered explicitly or implicitly to provide legal advice or legal representation; or

  4. Those activities described in section 81.102.B.

  B. "Legal representation" means acting as an advocate in governmental adjudicative proceedings in a court or administrative agency to determine the specific rights or obligations of one or more persons.

  C. "Legal advice" means acting in a professional capacity as a personal advisor to another person as to the specific rights or obligations of one or more persons through the interpretation and application of laws, regulations, and other legal standards;

  D. "In a professional capacity" means acting i) with the expectation that compensation for such advice will be provided by or on behalf of the person receiving the advice or that such compensation, although ordinarily expected by the provider, will be waived for charitable or civic reasons, ii) with the express or implied representation that the provider is an attorney or lawyer, or iii) as part of a pattern of recurring conduct .in which the provider holds himself or herself out as an advisor having special competence in the interpretation and application of laws, regulations, and other legal standards.

  E. "Individual" means a human being.

  F. "Person" means an individual, corporation, organization, government or governmental subdivision or agency, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, association, or any legal entity.

  G. "Attorney" or "lawyer" means an individual who is a member of the state bar or is otherwise licensed and in good standing to practice law in another state of the United States.

  H. The definition of the practice of law in this section is not exclusive and does not deprive the judicial branch of the power and authority to determine whether other services and acts not enumerated may constitute the practice of law.

  Since you are not the "judicial branch" of the good state of Texas, or a representative of it, I don't think Section H, above, applies to you. While that branch could very well "find" that someone here may have committed UPL, it's highly unlikely... given the nature of the board, the nature/purpose of the question, and the nature/purpose of the responses (one time, for the purpose of discussion, not commercial gain, etc.).

  YOU saw the words "lawyer" and "advice," dear one, and immediately took this to a "professional" level. No one else did... because it wasn't that serious (here). And no one here usually does, EXCEPT you. Which is understandable - you are a lawyer. But some here might think the same of you if you, say, offered someone some "advice" on how to deal with a cold/the flu... just in discussion and just based on YOUR experience with such. Yet, you are not a doctor and so aren't "licensed" to give MEDICAL advice. But... people do.

  The OP was "advised" to get an attorney, if not look into mediation. Both are appropriate. And no one here claimed to be an attorney; in fact, at least one disclaimer WAS made.

  Really, dear BOTR... I realize you disagree (and so, may be throwing your own little hissy fit over this), but you've tried to make a serious mountain... out of a very small mole-hill. It is this tendence that has made me second-think becoming an attorney more than any other: the whole, "Oooh... gasp... YOU did [something]... but only me and my cronies can get you out of it... for a fee, of course!" mentality. It often turns my stomach... because not everyone can AFFORD that fee... to for one to KNOW what could be done... but withhold it simply because another can't afford their fee... makes me, a slave of Christ, cringe. It's SO tantamount to what religious leaders... who were formerly "lawyers", were they not... do, as well.

  So, again, peace to you... and take a breath... and perhaps a walk, girl. It just ain't THAT serious. The dear OP SAID he had access to legal counsel and intended to use it. So, no need to go ripping your garments and throwing ashes in the air, crying "Lord! What have they DONE?!" over there in NYC. Really. Absolutely NO need.

  SA, on her own...