1. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. U.S. v. Willard JOHNSON U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, 327 F.3d 554 (2003) Case Brief

2. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. U.S. v. JOHNSON PURPOSE: Johnson illustrates how an independent paralegal engaging in the unauthorized practice of law interfered with the attorney-client relationship.

3. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. U.S. v. JOHNSON CAUSE OF ACTION: Unauthorized practice of law.

4. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. U.S. v. JOHNSON FACTS: Robinson, a disbarred attorney, was the executive director of National Legal Professional Associates (NLPA). NLPA provided pretrial, sentencing, and post-conviction services to criminal defendants, soliciting their business and suggesting their defense attorneys might not be up to par. Defendant Johnson wanted his court-appointed attorney, Kavanaugh, to use NLPAs services. When Kavanaugh declined, Johnson filed a disciplinary complaint against Kavanaugh, who sought the courts permission to withdraw from the case. The judge, with prior experience with NLPA, investigated whether Robinson and NLPA had been engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.

5. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. U.S. v. JOHNSON ISSUE: Did Robinson and NLPA engage in the unauthorized practice of law?

6. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. U.S. v. JOHNSON HOLDING: Yes, The Court of Appeals upheld the district courts conclusion that appellants were engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.

7. Copyright 2007 Thomson Delmar Learning. All Rights Reserved. U.S. v. JOHNSON REASONING: The court decided that practicing law involves providing any advice or other service requiring the use of any legal skill or knowledge,... the legal effect of which, under the facts and conditions involved, must be carefully determined. The services provided by NLPA, constituted the practice of law without the supervision of an attorney. NLPA marketed services in such a way that the criminal defendant lost confidence in the attorney. This resulted in NLPA, rather than the attorney, advising the client on case strategy.