Posted On: 06/30/2016 12:24:32 AM
Post# of 72447
Anyone have knowledge enough to comment on this last part of Mr. Stern's response?
Federal Courts have the inherent power to sanction the unauthorized practice of law.
United States v. Johnson, 327 F.3d 554, 561 (7th Cir. 2003); Drake v. Ham, No. CIV.A. 3:06-
1611MJPJ, 2007 WL 2302575, at *2 (D.S.C. Aug. 9, 2007). Mr. Sullivan has unambiguously
committed the unauthorized practice of law. “‘Practice of law’ includes ‘the preparation of legal
instruments of all kinds, and in general all advice to clients and all action taken for them in
matters connected with the law.’” United States v. Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen & Helpers of Am., AFL-CIO, No. 88 CIV. 4486 (DNE), 1996 WL 383237, *3
(S.D.N.Y. July 8, 1996) (quoting In re Schwerzmann, 408 N.Y.S.2d 187, 189 (App. Div. 1978)).
Mr. Sullivan committed the unauthorized practice of law by preparing, signing and serving upon
Plaintiffs a motion for sanctions without first obtaining pro hac vice admission before this Court.
Federal Courts have the inherent power to sanction the unauthorized practice of law.
United States v. Johnson, 327 F.3d 554, 561 (7th Cir. 2003); Drake v. Ham, No. CIV.A. 3:06-
1611MJPJ, 2007 WL 2302575, at *2 (D.S.C. Aug. 9, 2007). Mr. Sullivan has unambiguously
committed the unauthorized practice of law. “‘Practice of law’ includes ‘the preparation of legal
instruments of all kinds, and in general all advice to clients and all action taken for them in
matters connected with the law.’” United States v. Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen & Helpers of Am., AFL-CIO, No. 88 CIV. 4486 (DNE), 1996 WL 383237, *3
(S.D.N.Y. July 8, 1996) (quoting In re Schwerzmann, 408 N.Y.S.2d 187, 189 (App. Div. 1978)).
Mr. Sullivan committed the unauthorized practice of law by preparing, signing and serving upon
Plaintiffs a motion for sanctions without first obtaining pro hac vice admission before this Court.
(0)
(0)
