# A client stole me from my employer. Is there a liability issue? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 1, 2006, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059 "2006-09-01T12:53:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Jodi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7feea3/32.png) [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2006, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/61 "2006-09-02T02:21:49Z")
I want to rush this in before the thread gets locked (if SC is lockiing it) – NUTTYBUNNY, post again in MPSIMS and let us know how it goes. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2006, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/62 "2006-09-05T01:00:57Z")
[QUOTE=Random] Non-competes are only one kind of employment covenant. [/QUOTE] Thank you. I intended to make this point earlier. \*\*Random \*\* is right; ther are plenty of other kinds of agreements that look a little like non-competes but get different treatment from courts. > [@](#): > > The OP’s situation does not seem to involve a a non compete. So much of what you say is not only wrong (as a blanket statement about noncompetes), but irrelevant to the OP’s situation. Please stop. You don’t know what you’re talking about. Exactly. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2006, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/63 "2006-09-05T01:48:44Z")
I’m not a lawyer so I won’t offer any legal opinions. But what I will say is that I expect you won’t be happy with your new job in the long run. Your new employer has shown they have no respect for their business relationships. How will they treat you, a mere employee ? Secondly, you are presently employed with a professional accounting firm. It is in their interest to invest in you by keeping you abreast of current developments and hopefully advance to a more senior position. Your new job won’t be the same. The focus of this HVAC company is to make money and accounting is an inconvenient overhead. You are paid well for what you know now. Will they continue to invest in you ? When a senior position in accounting opens up will they go to you or will they go to a headhunter to find someone who has developed more current qualifications in the professional arena? I’m not saying that this will be the case in your situation, but I made that mistake jumping from an engineering firm to a heavy construction firm very early in my engineering career for much bigger bucks and regretted it ever since. ---
**Author:** ![Nutty\_Bunny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/d07c76/32.png) [@Nutty\_Bunny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nutty_Bunny)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/64 "2006-09-06T15:51:55Z")
After a long weekend of worrying about whether or not my new employer would still want to hire me, I found out that everyone at my current office has cooled down and things are fine. I heard the same thing from my new employer, so everything is fine. Everyone had a knee-jerk reaction to my telling them because I’m the one with the most experience and can handle the messiest of books. Plus, they were planning on firing someone that afternoon (she was very incompetent). So, I start on Sept. 18, but I’m still working there during the afternoons as a CPA firm employee. They can’t wait, because I’m $55 per hour, as opposed to $20, when I’m hired. 🙂 Thanks for all the advice. I’m sorry it got so heated. I didn’t mean to get legal advice per se, but more “hey, have you experienced this” kind of advice. ---
**Author:** ![Nutty\_Bunny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/d07c76/32.png) [@Nutty\_Bunny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nutty_Bunny)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2006, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/65 "2006-09-06T16:25:58Z")
[QUOTE=The Flying Dutchman] I’m not a lawyer so I won’t offer any legal opinions. But what I will say is that I expect you won’t be happy with your new job in the long run. Your new employer has shown they have no respect for their business relationships. How will they treat you, a mere employee ? Secondly, you are presently employed with a professional accounting firm. It is in their interest to invest in you by keeping you abreast of current developments and hopefully advance to a more senior position. [/quote] That will never happen with my Associates degree. > [@](#): > > You are paid well for what you know now. Will they continue to invest in you ? When a senior position in accounting opens up will they go to you or will they go to a headhunter to find someone who has developed more current qualifications in the professional arena? I’m not sure if you mean the accounting firm. $15/hour is not considered well-paid in my field. It’s the Associates degree again. > [@](#): > > I’m not saying that this will be the case in your situation, but I made that mistake jumping from an engineering firm to a heavy construction firm very early in my engineering career for much bigger bucks and regretted it ever since. I’m sorry to hear that. That sucks. I’ve had my fleeting moments of doubt, but I think that is just fear of the unknown. The new employer expects the position I’m in to grow into more of a controllership position, rather than full-charge bookkeeper. There’s no growth at the accounting firm. They even told me that when they hired me. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2006, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/66 "2006-09-07T15:26:01Z")
[QUOTE=Gfactor] You’re in CA, right? Not a licensed attorney? You should probably review this: [http://da.co.la.ca.us/pdf/UPLpublic.pdf#search=“california%20unauthorized%20practice%20of%20law”](http://da.co.la.ca.us/pdf/UPLpublic.pdf#search=%22california%20unauthorized%20practice%20of%20law%22)[/urlThus California today defines law practice as providing “legal advice and legal instrument and contract preparation, whether or not these subjects were rendered in the course of litigation.” Birbower, Montalban, Condo & Frank, P.C . v Superior Court., supra, at 128. Providing legal advice or service is a violation of the State Bar Act if done by an unlicensed person, even if the advice or service does not relate to any matter pending before a court. (Mickel v. Murphy (1957) 147 Cal.App.2d 718, 721.) ] [/QUOTE] I’d \*love \* to see a cite where someone was convicted of this when the layperson involved did NOT do one or both of the following: 1. Pass themsleves off an an attorney, or 2. Charge for that advice/service. I mean, doesn’t the 1st Ad give one the right to Free speech? Now, I admit the State has the right to license businesses and professionals (so, sure, they could nab you if you charged for legal advice) and also Fraud is a crime (so they could nab you if you falsely claimed to be a lawyer), but an off the cuff remark- even if on legal issues- doesn’t seem to me like the sort of thing they could successfully prosecute. So, do you have a cite where a layperson was convicted of such a crime where the two factors I mentioned above were _not_ in evidence? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Flipshod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/f19dbf/32.png) [@Flipshod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flipshod)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2006, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/67 "2006-09-07T18:04:12Z")
As others have said, if you are working under a contract, or there is a contract between the two employers, then the question is the enforceability of the contract. Otherwise, you’re probably clear. I just wanted to add though, that back in my old days as a CPA, the move from the CPA firm to the client’s firm was a normal, natural career progression. It might burden your immediate supervisor a bit, but anytime you leave that happens, and in the long run having ex-employees working for their clients helps CPA firms maintain good relationships (and better service). ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2006, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/68 "2006-09-07T19:00:20Z")
[QUOTE=DrDeth] I’d \*love \* to see a cite where someone was convicted of this when the layperson involved did NOT do one or both of the following: 1. Pass themsleves off an an attorney, or 2. Charge for that advice/service. I mean, doesn’t the 1st Ad give one the right to Free speech? Now, I admit the State has the right to license businesses and professionals (so, sure, they could nab you if you charged for legal advice) and also Fraud is a crime (so they could nab you if you falsely claimed to be a lawyer), but an off the cuff remark- even if on legal issues- doesn’t seem to me like the sort of thing they could successfully prosecute. So, do you have a cite where a layperson was convicted of such a crime where the two factors I mentioned above were _not_ in evidence? 😕 [/QUOTE] Perhaps of tengential interest is the famous case of Nolo Press, in Texas. As I recall the basic facts, Nolo Press published a series of “self-help” books and forms to assist people in various legal matters. If you wanted a simple will, for example, Nolo had a “fill-in-the-blanks” will. If you wanted a simple lease, there was a lease boilerplate in a Nolo book to use. They did, admittedly, charge people for the books they sold. The Texas bar committee on the unauthorized practice of law investigated and charged Nolo with violating Texas law with respect to unauthorized practice thereof. They alleged that publishing these books amounted to the practice of law. I don’t remember if Nolo was ultimately convicted and appealed, or whether the following event happened during the original trial, but the Texas legislature met in special session to pass a law exempting book self-help books and software from the state’s UPL statute, as long as there was a disclaimer on the cover saying that the product was not, in fact, a lawyer. So the case was ultimately mooted. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2006, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/69 "2006-09-07T19:14:23Z")
[QUOTE=DrDeth] I’d \*love \* to see a cite where someone was convicted of this when the layperson involved did NOT do one or both of the following: 1. Pass themsleves off an an attorney, or 2. Charge for that advice/service. I mean, doesn’t the 1st Ad give one the right to Free speech? Now, I admit the State has the right to license businesses and professionals (so, sure, they could nab you if you charged for legal advice) and also Fraud is a crime (so they could nab you if you falsely claimed to be a lawyer), but an off the cuff remark- even if on legal issues- doesn’t seem to me like the sort of thing they could successfully prosecute. So, do you have a cite where a layperson was convicted of such a crime where the two factors I mentioned above were _not_ in evidence? 😕 [/QUOTE] Here’s one: _South Carolina v. McLauren_, 563 S.E.2d 346 (S.C. 2002). A jailhouse lawyer cannot provide legal advice to inmates and assist them with filling out forms, even if he discloses that he is not a lawyer and even if he is not paid: > [@SC Supreme Court](#): > > Additionally, whether an individual is paid for his or her services is irrelevant. The reasons for prohibiting the unauthorized practice of law are not to protect licensed attorneys from losing business to unlicensed individuals. Rather, the purpose is to protect the public from consequences resulting 'from the erroneous preparation of legal documents or the inaccurate legal advice given by persons untrained in the law. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2006, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/70 "2006-09-07T19:17:23Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] Perhaps of tengential interest is the famous case of Nolo Press, in Texas. . . . So the case was ultimately mooted. [/QUOTE] I think this is the case you are talking about: _UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW COMMITTEE v. PARSONS TECHNOLOGY, INC d/b/a Quicken Family Lawyer_: [Home - Boston College](http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/law/st_org/iptf/exhibits/1999031701_uplc_v_parsons.html), _vacated and remanded_, 179 F.3d 956; 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 14234 (5th Cir. 1999) (based on intervening change of law). Forgive the rather eclectic citation form. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2006, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/71 "2006-09-07T19:19:48Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] Perhaps of tengential interest is the famous case of Nolo Press, in Texas. As I recall the basic facts, Nolo Press published a series of “self-help” books and forms to assist people in various legal matters. If you wanted a simple will, for example, Nolo had a “fill-in-the-blanks” will. If you wanted a simple lease, there was a lease boilerplate in a Nolo book to use. They did, admittedly, charge people for the books they sold. The Texas bar committee on the unauthorized practice of law investigated and charged Nolo with violating Texas law with respect to unauthorized practice thereof. They alleged that publishing these books amounted to the practice of law. I don’t remember if Nolo was ultimately convicted and appealed, or whether the following event happened during the original trial, but the Texas legislature met in special session to pass a law exempting book self-help books and software from the state’s UPL statute, as long as there was a disclaimer on the cover saying that the product was not, in fact, a lawyer. So the case was ultimately mooted. [/QUOTE] Ah yes, I remember that. Nolo never convicted. [http://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/September-October-2003/scene\_slater\_sepoct03.msp](http://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/September-October-2003/scene_slater_sepoct03.msp) "Publishers didn’t bite. A few years earlier, a guy named Norman Dacey had published a book called How to Avoid Probate and had promptly been convicted for the unauthorized practice of law. Dacey eventually won on appeal, and his book became a bestseller (beating out Masters and Johnson’s Human Sexual Response). Nevertheless, the publishers to whom Sherman sent his manuscript were wary of trespassing on the legal profession’s jealously guarded territory. " "At the same time, self-help law is still viewed with suspicion. Six years ago, Nolo was investigated by the Texas Supreme Court’s UPL subcommittee, which charged that the press’s Living Trust Maker software was (all by itself) practicing law without a license. Incensed, Nolo hired a real Texas lawyer and sued the UPL subcommittee for violating the company’s right to free speech. The press also called a few reporters. The image of Texas lawyers walking their big boots all over the First Amendment made for great publicity. Time magazine opined that “Nolo’s real crime may be putting the law into the hands of laypeople for $15 to $45 a pop.” Stung by the derision, the Texas legislature met in emergency session to pass a law exempting self-help books and software from the state’s UPL statute, as long as there was a disclaimer on the cover saying that the product was not, in fact, a lawyer. Nolo sales in Texas skyrocketed. Like the earlier tiff with the Sacramento Bar Association, the episode turned into a boon for the company. " Thus, these cases would _seem_ to indicate that _some_ sorts of “legal advice” by non-attorneys _do_ come under the 1st Ad. At least as far as printing a self-help legal book, anyway. I completely agree that non-lawyers should \*not \* give specific advice on non-trivial non-hypothetical “legal problems”. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2006, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/72 "2006-09-07T19:28:49Z")
[QUOTE=Bricker] Here’s one: _South Carolina v. McLauren_, 563 S.E.2d 346 (S.C. 2002). A jailhouse lawyer cannot provide legal advice to inmates and assist them with filling out forms, even if he discloses that he is not a lawyer and even if he is not paid: [/QUOTE] \*Very good cite. \* But it appears that the dude did attempt to pass himself off as a lawyer: “McLauren filed a PCR application on behalf of Mark E. Rourk, also an inmate at the Allendale Correctional Institution. The PCR application stated that it had been completed by “Brent C. McLauren, Jr., Esq. … Of Legal Counsel to Petitioner.” The application included a cover letter that stated “Brent C. McLauren, Jr., Esq.” The documents submitted included a PCR application, a memorandum of law, motions, an affidavit of service, and a statement of legal counsel. The documents were filed in Dorchester County. McLauren is not and never has been a licensed attorney in South Carolina.”… “He admitted several times he practiced law, stating at one point, “\*f I was in society practicing law in the same capacity that I practice law while incarcerated ….” In a cross examination question, he stated, “You should be aware that I’ve been practicing law, if that’s what you want to call it ….” He later stated, “I have no problem with admitting that I’m a jailhouse lawyer ….”” But I’ll give you a half point, as that’s a pretty damn good cite. Thanks! ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2006, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/73 "2006-09-07T19:49:04Z")
McLauren is puzzling, in view of \*Johnson v. Avery \*and its progeny. > [@](#): > > More recent decisions have struck down restrictions and required remedial measures to insure that inmate access to the courts is adequate, effective, and meaningful. Thus, in order to prevent “effectively foreclosed access,” indigent prisoners must be allowed to file appeals and habeas corpus petitions without payment of docket fees. Burns v. Ohio, 360 U.S. 252, 257 (1959); Smith v. Bennett, 365 U.S. 708 (1961). Because we recognized that “adequate and effective appellate review” is impossible without a trial transcript or adequate substitute, we held that States must provide trial records to inmates unable to buy them. Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12, 20 (1956). 8 Similarly, counsel must be appointed [430 U.S. 817, 823] to give indigent inmates “a meaningful appeal” from their convictions. Douglas v. California, 372 U.S. 353, 358 (1963). > > Essentially the same standards of access were applied in Johnson v. Avery, 393 U.S. 483 (1969), which struck down a regulation prohibiting prisoners from assisting each other with habeas corpus applications and other legal matters. Since inmates had no alternative form of legal assistance available to them, we reasoned that this ban on jailhouse lawyers effectively prevented prisoners who were “unable themselves, with reasonable adequacy, to prepare their petitions,” from challenging the legality of their confinements. Id., at 489. Johnson was unanimously extended to cover assistance in civil rights actions in Wolff v. McDonnell, 418 U.S. 539, 577 -580 (1974). And even as it rejected a claim that indigent defendants have a constitutional right to appointed counsel for discretionary appeals, the Court reaffirmed that State must “assure the indigent defendant an adequate opportunity to present his claims fairly.” Ross v. Moffitt, 417 U.S., at 616 . “[M]eaningful access” to the courts is the touchstone. See id., at 611, 612, 615. 9 _Bounds v. Smith_, 430 U.S. 817 (1977): [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=430&invol=817](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=430&invol=817) Perhaps South Carolina has made other provisions for representation of inmates, or (as seems more likely) McLauren didn’t raise the issue in the trial court. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2006, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/74 "2006-09-07T19:51:45Z")
[QUOTE=Gfactor] McLauren is puzzling, in view of \*Johnson v. Avery \*and its progeny. _Bounds v. Smith_, 430 U.S. 817 (1977): [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=430&invol=817](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=430&invol=817) Perhaps South Carolina has made other provisions for representation of inmates, or (as seems more likely) McLauren didn’t raise the issue in the trial court. [/QUOTE] Could it be that the dude went beyond simple assistance to the point of calling himself “Brent C. McLauren, Jr., Esq. … Of Legal Counsel to Petitioner.” ? Another good cite, btw. 🆒 ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2006, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/75 "2006-09-07T19:54:56Z")
[QUOTE=Gfactor] Perhaps South Carolina has made other provisions for representation of inmates, or (as seems more likely) McLauren didn’t raise the issue in the trial court. [/QUOTE] If only he had been represented by a licensed attorney… 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2006, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/76 "2006-09-07T20:06:17Z")
[QUOTE=DrDeth] Could it be that the dude went beyond simple assistance to the point of calling himself “Brent C. McLauren, Jr., Esq. … Of Legal Counsel to Petitioner.” ? [/QUOTE] Definitely a possibility, but notice that he made two similar non-constitutional arguments (sections II and III of the opinion) and got tied up in nice readings of the statute. In section II, “He contends that many such inmates are indigent, uneducated, [\*\*\*12] and otherwise without any other available means to adequately pursue post- conviction relief,” which sounds a lot like _Avery_. The Court responded: > [@](#): > > “The generally understood definition of [\*\*\*13] the practice of law ‘embraces the preparation of pleadings, and other papers incident to actions and special proceedings, and the management of such actions and proceedings on behalf of clients before judges and courts.’” State v. Despain, 319 S.C. 317, 319, 460 S.E.2d 576, 577 (1995) (quoting In re Duncan, 83 S.C. 186, 189, 65 S.E. 210, 211 (1909)). Our Supreme Court has defined the practice of law to include the preparation and filing of legal documents involving the giving of advice, consultation, explanation, or recommendations on matters of law. State v. Robinson, 321 S.C. 286, 468 S.E.2d 290 (1996). The reason preparing documents for others must be held to constitute the practice of law [\*\*351] is not for the economic protection of the legal profession. Despain, 319 S.C. at 320, 460 S.E.2d at 578. Rather, it is for the protection of the public from the potentially severe economic and emotional consequences that may flow from the erroneous preparation of legal documents [\*499] or the inaccurate legal advice given by persons untrained in the law. Id. (citing State v. Buyers Serv. Co., 292 S.C. 426, 357 S.E.2d 15 (1987)). [\*\*\*14] Just because McLauren was not in court for Rourk does not mean that he was not practicing law, as he was preparing and submitting documents on Rourk’s behalf, which in itself constitutes the practice of law. Doesn’t sound like the court found Esq. and Legal Counsel significant. Section III is telling: > [@](#): > > McLauren argues § 40-5-80, when read in connection with § 40-5-310, should be construed to allow him to help other inmates in preparation of their PCR applications as long as he does not take fees or gratuities. > > Section 40-5-80 provides the following: > > This chapter shall not be construed so as to prevent a citizen from prosecuting or defending his own cause, if he so desires, or the cause of another, with leave of the court first had and obtained; provided, that he declare on oath, if required, that he neither has accepted nor will accept or take any fee, gratuity or reward on account of such prosecution or defense or for any other matter relating to the cause. > > (emphasis added, italics in original). > > McLauren stated he did not receive compensation for his services. We agree that § 40-5-80 does not prevent representation of another without compensation. However, the express language of § 40-5-80 requires that leave [\*\*\*15] be obtained first. Robinson, 321 S.C. at 290, 468 S.E.2d at 292 (analyzing S.C. Code Ann. § 40-5-80). Further, it is within the trial judge’s sound discretion whether to allow such representation. Id. There is no evidence that McLauren obtained leave from the court before giving advice and preparing the PCR application. Since he did not obtain leave, his argument is without merit. So \*Avery \* probably would not have helped him. He could indeed have assisted inmates as long as he got court permission first. But it doesn’t look like he even brought it up. And the arguments he did make were no better. [QUOTE=Bricker] If only he had been represented by a licensed attorney… [/QUOTE] Wasn’t gonna say it. 😉 Again, please excuse the poorly edited quotations. Busy day today. ---
**Author:** ![Gfactor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/9de053/32.png) [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2006, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/77 "2006-09-07T20:24:33Z")
**DrDeth** , there is definitely something to your point about the First Amendment. As Wolfram notes in _Modern Legal Ethics_ (Student ed. 1986): > [@](#): > > Courts are more willing to find that advice constituted unauthorized practice if a fee was charged for it. Of course, the advice is equally dangerous, if it is dangerous at all, whether freely given or for a fee. Yet those decisions nonetheless draw a convenient line between commercialized advice giving, which is an activity that predictably would be repreated in order to gain revenue, and, on the other hand, advising that may be the natural product of friendship or other affinities that courts should be loath to restrict. The presence or absence of pecuniary gain is a dividing line that the Supreme Court has also employed in differentiating between protected and unprotected free speech. Clearly, to treat every utterance of legal advice as unauthorized practice would run afoul of expressive and associational rights recognized by the Supreme Court. (footnotes omitted). _But see_, _Parsons_, cited above (upholding Texas UPL rule without reference to commercial speech cases, noting the rule was content-neutral and withstood intermediate level scrutiny under _O’Brien_). ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2006, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/78 "2006-09-07T20:46:16Z")
[QUOTE=Nutty Bunny] They are already paying our firm’s HR consultant affiliate to find someone for the position. [/QUOTE] Gentlemen, you can’t fight here. This is GQ! 🙂 Anyhow, this struck me. Do you know if your new employer is planning to pay your old employer the fee they would have gotten if they had placed someone in your new job? If not, I can certainly understand why they are pissed. When I used to hire contractors (in New Jersey) the agencies were very clear upfront if hiring the contractors ourselves was allowed, and, if so, what the terms would be. Some forbade it, and some encouraged it, with the appropriate reward for them. In my experience, it is considered very bad form for a customer or vendor of a company to poach people from that company. If it happens, there are often high level checks before an offer is made, to avoid the very situation you’re now experiencing. Your new employers are very naive at best. BTW, some people have suggested you try to get your current employer to match the salary. Bad move. If they do, start looking for a job immediately, since you’ve proven yourself to be disloyal, and they would probably be looking for your replacement as soon as you get the new salary. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 7, 2006, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/79 "2006-09-07T20:58:27Z")
Thanks **Gfactor** and **Bricker**. Very educational. 🆒 ---
**Author:** ![Nutty\_Bunny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/d07c76/32.png) [@Nutty\_Bunny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nutty_Bunny)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2006, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059/80 "2006-09-08T16:53:00Z")
[QUOTE=Voyager] Anyhow, this struck me. Do you know if your new employer is planning to pay your old employer the fee they would have gotten if they had placed someone in your new job? If not, I can certainly understand why they are pissed. [/quote] I think they paid the deposit so far and they had interviewed a bunch of people our HR firm sent over there, so I can’t see how they would get away with not paying. The CPA & HR firms are owned by the same people, so the relationship w/ the CPA firm would deteriorate. > [@](#): > > BTW, some people have suggested you try to get your current employer to match the salary. Bad move. If they do, start looking for a job immediately, since you’ve proven yourself to be disloyal, and they would probably be looking for your replacement as soon as you get the new salary. That’s funny. When I was talking to my manager, she said “There was talk of a counteroffer with more money and less tax season hours, but we didn’t want to put the stess of making the decision on you.” She also said that at my review at the end of September, they were going to raise my salary about $10K anyway, which is complete bullshit. Why even mention these two things if they aren’t on the table? They’ve told me I’m their best employee in this department (which is true–everyone else is either new or inexperienced), so I’m surprised they didn’t try to keep me. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-client-stole-me-from-my-employer-is-there-a-liability-issue/371059.md?page=5)