Can I have a non-lawyer defend me at trial?

[Elendil_s_Heir]

@Tom_Tildrum

As an aside, one consequence of this rule is that a corporation appearing in court must always be represented by a lawyer. A non-lawyer CEO can’t try to defend the corporation by claiming that the corporation is representing itself.

Even more off-topic: Back when I was a law clerk, I sat in on a civil trial once where both parties (individuals) were proceeding without lawyers. It was excruciating.

That’s small claims court for you; I see it almost every day. Moreover, in Ohio small claims courts, corporations may indeed appear through non-counsel, but that person cannot then carry out “acts of advocacy,” such as making motions or conducting cross-examination. Small Ma-and-Pa companies may still choose to go forward without counsel, and often do.

Here’s a case about a defendant’s buddy trying to intervene in a civil case as defendant’s quasi-lawyer, and getting the door slammed in his face by the court:
http://www.lawriter.net/CaseView.aspx?scd=OH&DocId=113125&Index=D%3A\dtSearch\INDEX\OH\OHCASENE2D&HitCount=3&hits=53+34d+34e+&hc=3&fcount=1&fn=886+N.E.2d+292%2C+146+Ohio+Misc.2d+6%2C+2007-Ohio-7266&id=0&ct=1

[Evil_Economist]

@Elendil_s_Heir

Here’s a case about a defendant’s buddy trying to intervene in a civil case as defendant’s quasi-lawyer, and getting the door slammed in his face by the court:
Casemaker

Sorry, but I think this link is members-only.

[Elendil_s_Heir]

My apologies. The relevant portion:

…The court next turns to Harrison’s motion for intervention. Harrison indicates that he wishes to “speak on the behalf of [plaintiff]" in this case. He signed plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction as plaintiff’s “authorized representative." This purported status is also reflected in plaintiff’s complaint for injunctive relief, in her application for default judgment, and in her motion for hearing. Harrison also appears listed as such in plaintiff’s “Notarial protest/certificate of dishonor," filed herein as Exhibit E; in her “Notice of final discharge of application and-[sic] notice of fault in dishonor," Exhibit G; and in her “Acknowledgement/grant of exclusive power of attorney to conduct business, and legal affairs of principal person," Exhibit J. In the latter document, plaintiff purported to appoint Harrison as her “private attorney in fact," “grantee authorized rep.," “exclusive attorney-in-fact" and “grantee, attorney in fact."

Despite this dizzying array of titles, Harrison does not claim to be a licensed attorney in good standing. The Attorney Registration Section of the Supreme Court of Ohio has advised this court that Harrison is not, in fact, a lawyer admitted to practice in Ohio. The Supreme Court has exclusive authority over who may be admitted to the practice of law in this state. Section 2(B)(1)(g), Article IV, Ohio Constitution; Smith v. Kates (1976), 46 Ohio St.2d 263, 265, 75 O.O.2d 318, 348 N.E.2d 320. A nonlawyer may not engage in cross-examination, argument, or other acts of advocacy that would constitute the unauthorized practice of law. Cleveland Bar Assn. v. Pearlman, 106 Ohio St.3d 136, 2005-Ohio-4107, 832 N.E.2d 1193. Except for those appearing pro se, as plaintiff has already done, only a lawyer may make legal arguments in an official proceeding. Dayton Supply & Tool Co. v. Bd. of Revision, 111 Ohio St.3d 367, 2006-Ohio-5852, 856 N.E.2d 926 .

Harrison is not a lawyer and cannot act for plaintiff in that capacity. He is cautioned that any further action by him as a legal representative of plaintiff, or further filings using any terms or titles that might imply such a delegation of authority by plaintiff, will result in a referral… for investigation and possible prosecution for the unauthorized practice of law…

Kendrick v. E. Ohio Gas Co. (2007), 146 Ohio Misc.2d 6.

[Bricker]

@Elendil_s_Heir

My apologies. The relevant portion:

Actually, and with all due respect, I’d say an equally relevant portion is the following, which shows how well legal advice from non-lawyers can play out in court:

In essence, this case is about plaintiff’s repeated attempts to require defendant to accept bogus and nonsensical “bonds of acceptance to discharge attachment of the debt” as payment for gas service provided to her.

The court must admit that “*t is hard to know how to approach the virtually impenetrable wall of legalistic gibberish which [plaintiff] has erected.” (citation omitted) As ever, “[s]ome people believe with great fervor preposterous things that just happen to coincide with their self-interest.” (citation omitted) Plaintiff apparently contends that the American dollar is worthless, that she is entitled to free gas service, and that quasi-legalistic documents directing a creditor to seek payment from the United States Treasury are an acceptable form of payment. On each of these points, she is badly mistaken.

My clue, even before looking up the opinion myself, was from the portion EH posted involving the attempt to use a “notice of fault in dishonor.” For whatever bizarre reason, this phrase is a favorite of tax protesters and jailhouse lawyers.

[Rumor_Watkins]

@Bricker

Actually, and with all due respect, I’d say an equally relevant portion is the following, which shows how well legal advice from non-lawyers can play out in court:

My clue, even before looking up the opinion myself, was from the portion EH posted involving the attempt to use a “notice of fault in dishonor.” For whatever bizarre reason, this phrase is a favorite of tax protesters and jailhouse lawyers.

that’s a great line “some people believe with great fervor preposterous things that just happen to coincide with their self-interest.”

[Elendil_s_Heir]

Yeah, I like quoting that line, too.

Bricker, there was no indication in that case (which I worked on) that defendant was relying on the advice of her quasi-lawyer in putting forward such stupid arguments. It could’ve all come out of her own tiny little mind.

[barbitu8]

@ivn1188

You can represent yourself. But someone who does not have a license to practice law could not represent you. They would in fact be engaging in the practice of law without a license, and they would probably get their ass kicked in court anyway (just like you will if you go pro se).

There are even unsettled issues about having someone represent you in things like an administrative proceeding. The current legal climate seems to be leaning away from even allowing that.

In administrative proceedings, at least in Social Security administrative proceedings, it is well established that your representative need not be an attorney. A federal regulation allows that. In fact, there are non-legal firms that do just disability cases in Social Security. At least those firms have employees who know the Social Security laws. If you get your friend to represent you, unless he or she is an expert in that field, you will lose your case.