1. C. ADMISSION TO PRACTICE  Primarily, qualifications for admission  Procedure in Missouri: SCt Rule 8  admin by Bd of Law Examiners  application for C&F report and for BE  take BE and MPRE  if adm denied, hearing BLE, appeal SCt

2. MO Formal Requirements (R8.03)  admission by examination  US citizen/national, permanent res., green card  JD ABA approved LS, or  adm in other US jur. + active practice 3 of last 5 yrs  adm in other US jur. + active status + 24 hrs. ABA approved LS w/n last 3 yrs  law degree from foreign jur. + adm to practice there +  active practice 3 of last 5 yrs or  good standing + 24 hrs ABA approved LS w/n last 3 yrs

3. Missouri Requirements c’t’d  Without examination (r. 8.10)  for 5 of last 10 years have been:  adm in other US jur which permits reciprocity + active practice, or  full-time service as lawyer in US gov or armed services, or  full time teaching in ABA approved LS  full-time practice as house counsel from office in other US jur.

4. Character and Fitness  Problem p. 62: any of three situations grounds for denying admission?  what is the standard for C&F?  MUSTAFA, p. 62: “good moral character and general fitness to practice law”  the Rules? (none explicitly stated in MO)  federal constitution? (Schware, n.1 p. 65) – due process! “rational connection with fitness or capacity to practice law”  who bears burden of proof?

5. Problem p. 62 c’t’d  The football game incident  denial of admission? “rational connection with fitness to practice?”  if not, duty to report? Depends on questions on application form?  MO Rule 8.04: found guilty of felony under law of any U.S. jur., ineligible for admission for 5 years after full resolution  n. 2 p. 65 out of date!

6. Problem p. 62 c’t’d  the plagiarism incident  “rationally connected”?  what more do you need to know?  activities with “Friends Opposed to Europeans”  “rationally connected”?  First Amendment protection?  Baird v. State Bar, n. 4 p. 66  Matthew Hale’s case, nn. 5-8 pp 66-68

7. D. THE UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW 1. Generally  What is the “practice of law”? Mo.Rev.Stat. s. 484.010: two dimensions  “practice of the law” : appearance as an advocate or drawing of papers, pleadings, etc., in a representative capacity in conjunction with any proceedings before a court or other body having authority to settle controversies  “law business”: for a valuable consideration, advising or counseling as to secular law, drawing any document affecting secular rights, any act in a representative capacity tending to obtain or secure any property rights

8. Problem pp. 69-70: activities of a paralegal  selling “divorce kits” with printed instructions for preparing documents  does Grant give individualized advice to buyers about what docs to use or how to fill them out? If so, “legal skill or knowledge” is required, Grant is unauthorized  only general advice? If so, no UAP in most jurs.

9. Problem p. 69 c’t’d  selling “Living Trust Kits” as seminars at which a lawyer is featured speaker  Lawyer discusses associated legal problems  Grant will sell the kits and help the buyers gather the data and fill out the forms  individualized legal advice?  direct supervision of attorney?

10. Problem p. 69 c’t’d  Selling lawyer-prepared eviction forms to landlords who fill them out to initiate court proceedings – any problem?  Appearing before the court for the landlord to assert the eviction claim, on the basis of a “power of attorney” executed by the latter – can the power of attorney do that?

11. Problem p. 69 c’t’d: responsibility of attorney  MRPC 5.5(a): lawyer shall not assist another in the unauthorized practice of law  Angela at the seminars: if Grant is engaged in UAP, is Angela assisting him in doing so?  is knowledge of what Grant will do required?  Angela preparing eviction forms for Grant to sell: improper assistance here?

12. Pro Se Representation, n. 6 p. 76  Could Grant’s landlords appear in eviction proceedings without a lawyer?  If the landlord is a corporation or a partnership, can one of its officers or partners appear on behalf of the entity without a lawyer?

13. D(2): MULTIJURISDICTIONAL PRACTICE  lawyer admitted in one jurisdiction, who wants to provide legal services in another  default position: you need a license there  Birbrower (Cal. 1998), see Najam, J., in CONK p. 80-1, and n. 1 p. 82: if your services in another jur. are UAP there, you can’t recover fees there  CONK, p. 78: how is this different from Birbrower?  what is the issue?  how did the contacts differ, if at all?

14. Problem p. 77  facts inspired by Birbrower  any differences?  how about the fact that the Birbrower firm’s activities in California were related to a pending arbitration proceeding?  MRPC 5.5(c): post-Birbrower amendment!  provided on temporary basis  arise out of or reasonably related to practice in jurisdiction where lawyer is admitted

15. Special admissions  Admission pro hac vice  authorized representation in court  inherent power of individual court, subject to regulate  Special admission for house counsel  MRPC 5.5(d) – general permission  MO S.Ct. Rule 8.105 requires application, includes forensic services