| LEO Num | Topics | Summary | Date |
1464
 Print
|
| A city attorney acting as a "scrivener" for citizens preparing proposed ordinances to be considered by a city council might be deemed to be acting as a lawyer for the group if the lawyer's services created the "expectation" of such a relationship in the minds of the citizens. [Superseded in LEO 1803, which held that the existence of an attorney client relationship depends on the lawyer's action rather than a mere title, and holding that the attorney client relationship would arise between prisoners and lawyers practicing at a state prison if the lawyers did anything more than simply typing up what the prisoner wrote]. (reconsideration 2/9/93) | 2/9/1993 |
1352
Print
|
| A lawyer acted as a "scrivener" for two shareholders of a corporation attempting to reach an agreement (the lawyer had represented the company, and therefore properly declined to represent either shareholder in their dispute). The Bar warned that a lawyer acting as a "scrivener" faces multiple representation problems, especially if the parties are not otherwise represented by lawyers. If a dispute arises between shareholders of a closely held corporation, the lawyer may not play any role if the lawyer had been the corporation's lawyer. If one of the parties called the lawyer to testify, the lawyer should move to quash the subpoena. If the court denies the motion, the lawyer may testify. [Superseded in LEO 1803, which held that the existence of an attorney client relationship depends on the lawyer's action rather than a mere title, and holding that the attorney client relationship would arise between prisoners and lawyers practicing at a state prison if the lawyers did anything more than simply typing up what the prisoner wrote]. | 5/8/1990 |
1126
Print
|
| A lawyer acted as scrivener in representing one corporation making an agreement with another corporation. Now that the arrangement has fallen apart, the lawyer may represent the corporate client, because the other corporation was never a client. [Superseded in LEO 1803, which held that the existence of an attorney client relationship depends on the lawyer's action rather than a mere title, and holding that the attorney client relationship would arise between prisoners and lawyers practicing at a state prison if the lawyers did anything more than simply typing up what the prisoner wrote]. | 8/11/1988 |
0553
Print
|
| A lawyer prepared real estate documents for both the buyer and seller, but merely memorialized what the parties had independently negotiated and agreed. The lawyer may now represent the buyer in an action brought by the seller. [This LEO may be incorrect -- normally a lawyer in this situation could not represent either client if a dispute arises between them.][Superseded in LEO 1803, which held that the existence of an attorney client relationship depends on the lawyer's action rather than a mere title, and holding that the attorney client relationship would arise between prisoners and lawyers practicing at a state prison if the lawyers did anything more than simply typing up what the prisoner wrote]. | 6/21/1983 |
1874
Print
|
| Lawyers assisting members of a pre-paid legal services plan do not have to disclose their role in preparing pleadings that will be filed by pro se litigants, because "absent a court rule or law to the contrary, there is no ethical obligation to notify the court of the lawyer’s assistance to the pro se litigant." After reviewing ABA and other states' legal ethics opinions, "[t]he Committee concludes that there is not a provision in the Rules of Professional Conduct that prohibits undisclosed assistance to a pro se litigant as long as the lawyer does not do so in a manner that violates a rule of conduct that otherwise would apply to the lawyer’s conduct." Lawyers should nevertheless familiarize themselves with courts' policies about ghostwriting "lawyers are now on notice, because of Laremont-Lopez [Laremont-Lopez v. Southeastern Tidewater Opportunity Center, 968 F. Supp. 1075, 1077-78 (E.D. Va. 1997)] and other federal court cases, that 'ghostwriting' may be forbidden in some courts, and should take heed, even if such conduct does not violate any specific standing rule of court." [overruling inconsistent portions of LEOs 1127, 1592, 1761 and 1803] | 7/28/2014 |
1368
Print
|
| Lawyers may be shareholders of a corporation providing mediation and arbitration services, but the lawyers must comply with the ethics code. Among other things, a mediator "engaged by the parties as a scrivener of the agreement reached during the mediation process" is not engaged in the practice of law, but any services "beyond those of a scrivener" might constitute the practice of law [superseded in LEO 1803, which held that the existence of an attorney client relationship depends on the lawyer's action rather than a mere title, and holding that the attorney client relationship would arise between prisoners and lawyers practicing at a state prison if the lawyers did anything more than simply typing up what the prisoner wrote]. | 12/12/1990 |
1803
Print
|
| Lawyers practicing at a state prison may type up legal documents for inmates without establishing an attorney-client relationship with them, but should make it clear in such situations that the lawyer is not vouching for the document or otherwise giving legal advice; if the lawyer does anything more than act as a mere typist for an inmate preparing pleadings to be filed in court, the lawyer "must make sure that the inmate does not present himself to the court as having developed the pleadings pro se"; because the existence of an attorney-client relationship depends on the lawyer's actions rather than a mere title, the following earlier opinions regarding the role of a "scrivener" are superseded: LEOs 553, 824, 1126, 1352, 1368, 1464,1726, 1761. [overruled to the extent it is inconsistent with LEO 1874 (7/28/14), which explained that the ethics rules do not prohibit undisclosed assistance to a pro se litigant, but some courts forbid it] | 3/16/2005 |
1761
Print
|
| Legal services organization lawyers may give forms to pro se litigants without violating any prohibitions on “ghost-writing” as long as the lawyers do not assist the pro se` litigants in completing the forms; analogizing the situation to the distinction in the UPL analysis between providing forms and helping complete them. [Superseded in LEO 1803, which held that the existence of an attorney client relationship depends on the lawyer's action rather than a mere title, and holding that the attorney client relationship would arise between prisoners and lawyers practicing at a state prison if the lawyers did anything more than simply typing up what the prisoner wrote]. [overruled to the extent it is inconsistent with LEO 1874 (7/28/14), which explained that the ethics rules do not prohibit undisclosed assistance to a pro se litigant, but some courts forbid it] | 1/6/2002 |
1792
Print
|
| The Virginia Supreme Court indicated in UPL 0p. 207 that non-lawyer social workers may assist small claims court litigants "with completion of the form document using language specifically dictated by the litigant," but would be engaged in the unauthorized practice of law if the social worker "selects the forms for the litigant or advises the litigant as to which forms are appropriate based on the litigant's particular case; or provide[s] any legal advice to the litigant." Based on this UPL opinion, the Bar explains that lawyers may not train social workers in undertaking any of the prohibited activities. The Bar notes the "critical distinction" between undertaking activities that require "knowledge of the law," and undertaking activities that amount to the unauthorized practice of law. Thus, lawyers may train social workers "on the law needed for performance of a job," but may not train social workers to engage in activities that amount to the practice of law. [Approved by the Supreme Court of Virginia 11/2/16]. | 1/10/2006 |
0824
Print
|
| Under certain circumstances, a lawyer may represent a borrower and also serve as trustee without obtaining the borrower's consent (as long as the lawyer has acted as a "scrivener" in the deal, has not given any advice to the borrower, and does not continue to represent the borrower after the closing). If the lawyer (or anyone in the firm) has had any legal role in preparing the terms of any of the documents, the lawyer may act as trustee only with consent [This LEO vacated inconsistent portions of LEO 359; LEO 524; LEO 659; LEO 679.][Superseded in LEO 1803, which held that the existence of an attorney client relationship depends on the lawyer's action rather than a mere title, and holding that the attorney client relationship would arise between prisoners and lawyers practicing at a state prison if the lawyers did anything more than simply typing up what the prisoner wrote]. | 10/9/1986 |