UPL Archives - Legal Ethics Advisor

Florida Supreme Court: Ticket Defense App Is Engaged in The Unlicensed Practice of Law

by Camila Rivero-Fernandez in Florida Supreme Court, legal ethics, UPL. Posted October 27, 2021

In a controversial decision, Florida’s highest court held that a nonlawyer ticket defense app was providing legal services In a 4-3 decision, the Florida Supreme Court held that TIKD, a traffic ticket defense app, was engaged in the unlicensed practice of law (“UPL”). In doing so, the court declined to adopt the referee’s recommendation of ...

Remote Lawyering: New Jersey and Ohio On Board

by Camila Rivero-Fernandez in New Jersey, Ohio, Remote Work, UPL. Posted October 14, 2021

New Jersey joins other jurisdictions in providing guidance for lawyers working remotely, while Ohio implements 5.5 Rule Amendment As we continue to see the pandemic’s lasting effects on the practice of law, more states provide guidance on how to navigate the new era of practicing law remotely. Next up: New Jersey and Ohio. Although New ...

Florida Legal Ethics Update: From Questioning Diversity Quotas to Proposals for a Regulatory Sandbox and More

by Jan Jacobowitz in Access to Justice, Attorney Advertising, CLE requirements, legal ethics, Legal Services, negative online reviews, regulatory sandbox, Rule 5.4 Professional Independence of a Lawyer, Technology, UPL. Posted July 12, 2021

Florida CLE Diversity Controversy The Florida Supreme Court attracted national attention when it recently sua sponte changed the CLE programming requirements such that The Florida Bar cannot approve CLE programming and Florida lawyers cannot receive CLE credits for attendance at any program for which there was a diversity requirement or quota pertaining to the selection ...

Florida Approves Remote Work in Opinion SC20-1220

by Jan Jacobowitz in ABA Opinion, Advisory Opinion, Florida, Florida Bar, Florida Supreme Court, UPL. Posted May 28, 2021

New Jersey Lawyer May Work Remotely from Florida On May 20, 2021, the Florida Supreme Court approved an UPL Advisory Opinion that was filed with the Court in August 2020 and responded to a New Jersey Attorney’s inquiry as to whether he could practice New Jersey law from Florida without violating the unauthorized practice of ...

ABA Advises On Remote Practice From One Jurisdiction to Another

by Jan Jacobowitz in ABA, Advisory Opinion, UPL. Posted January 28, 2021

The ABA recently released Opinion Formal Opinion 495 to assist lawyers who may be working remotely from a jurisdiction in which they are not licensed to practice law.

From “Unlicensed Practice of Law” to “Practice of Law” — How a Pandemic Sparked Discussions to Abolish Specific Jurisdiction Requirements

by Julio Torres in UPL. Posted October 19, 2020

By now, there is no doubt that the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in drastic changes in the legal profession—from conducting appellate oral arguments through video conferencing platforms, to having numerous firms shift operations remotely. Jurisdiction

Working From Another State: Florida Guidance On The Unlicensed Practice of Law

by Camila Rivero-Fernandez in UPL. Posted August 18, 2020

The Florida Bar Standing Committee on The Unlicensed Practice of Law (“UPL”) issued a proposed advisory opinion on August 17, 2020, in which it concluded that a New Jersey attorney working from his Florida residence

Defining the Practice of Law: North Dakota Admonishes Minnesota Attorney for UPL

by Luiz Miranda in disciplinary action, Legal Services, multi jurisdictional practice, News, UPL. Posted October 7, 2015

Does the title “staff attorney” define the practice of law? The Supreme Court of North Dakota believes so.

[…] of a non-binding advisory opinion, as has been the case with other jurisdictions such as, Florida, San Francisco, and Delaware, it is important to note that Ohio went a step further and amended its rule regarding […]

Remote Lawyering: New Jersey and Ohio On Board - Legal Ethics Advisor on Remote Work: San Francisco Bar Association Advice in Ethics Opinion 2021-1
Not all jurisdictions have adopted the Model Rule version of the choice of law rule; seems like there might be a different result in at least some of those states. See, e.g., NY RPC 8.5(b)(2)(i) ("If the lawyer is licensed to practice only in this state, the rules to be applied shall be the rules of this state").

Art Lachman on ABA Opinion 499 Green Lights Lawyers’ Passive Investment in Firms with NonLawyer Ownership