Stark County Bar Ass'n v. Beaman, UPL-90-4

Decision Date17 December 1990
Docket NumberNo. UPL-90-4,UPL-90-4
Citation574 N.E.2d 599,60 Ohio Misc.2d 17
PartiesSTARK COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION v. BEAMAN, et al. Ohio Board of Commissioners on the Unauthorized Practice of Law
CourtOhio Board of Unauthorized Practice

Syllabus by the Court

A non-attorney who provides specific legal information in tax and estate matters is engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. (Green v. Huntington Natl. Bank of Columbus [1965], 4 Ohio St.2d 78, 33 O.O.2d 442, 212 N.E.2d 585, paragraph one of the syllabus, applied and followed.)

Robert C. Meyer, Massillon and Evan W. Morris, Jr., Alliance, for relator.

OPINION AND ORDER.

This matter came before the Board of Commissioners on the Unauthorized Practice of Law for formal hearing on September 21, 1990. Members of the board present and participating were Kenneth F. Seibel, Chairman, Santiago Feliciano, Jr., Paul M. Greenberger, Jeffrey L. Maloon, Dennis E. Murray, Sr., D. John Travis, and John W. Waddy, Jr.

Relator was represented by Robert C. Meyer and Evan W. Morris, Jr. Respondents, Andrew Beaman and Andrew Beaman, d.b.a. Hendershott-Beaman Associates, were served with the complaint, prehearing order, and notice of hearing. However, respondents did not file an answer to the complaint or prehearing order. Neither respondents nor their representative appeared at this hearing or otherwise communicated with the board.

Relator's complaint, filed May 10, 1990, alleged that respondent Beaman is not an attorney at law and that he has engaged in the unauthorized practice of law by:

(a) advising and counseling residents of Ohio, with respect to the laws of Ohio governing wills, descent and distribution, and estates, and the estate tax laws of Ohio and of the United States;

(b) advising and counseling residents of Ohio that a specific type of trust agreement would be suitable for their respective estates and should be established; and

(c) preparing and drafting trust agreements and other legal documents for residents of Ohio, and assisting residents of Ohio in the execution of those documents in Ohio to carry into legal effect the advice and counsel given, as aforesaid.

At the hearing, Robert C. Meyer, counsel for relator, stated that Beaman operates an estate-planning service and that he primarily uses a revocable living trust that he prepares and funds through the sale of life insurance and annuities. Meyer also stated that relator's unauthorized practice of law committee met with Beaman on January 19, 1990 and that Beaman indicated the following at the meeting:

(1) He went to law school in Canada and was at one time licensed to practice law there, but he is not licensed to practice law in Ohio.

(2) He has prepared trust agreements by combining forms he obtained from legal form books.

(3) He keeps abreast of changes in tax law and prepares addendums to his clients' trust agreements.

Relator's Exhibit 2, introduced at the September 21, 1990 hearing, is a transcript of a videotape used by respondents as a sales or promotional tool. In the videotape, Beaman purports to explain probate and trust law and the operation of the revocable living trusts that he creates, including income and estate tax consequences. Also introduced were trusts and addendums prepared by respondent for a client, Marjorie Miller.

Relator's Exhibit 3 is a four-page document entitled, "The Hendershott-Beaman Revocable Trust." This document, which relator obtained from Beaman together with Exhibit 2, was described by relator's counsel as a sales tool. Like the videotape, this document purports to explain probate and trust law, including the disposition of property, and to describe the operation of living trusts prepared by Beaman.

Section 2(A) of Gov.Bar R. VII states: "The unauthorized practice of law is the rendering of legal services for others by...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Mid-America Living Trust Associates, Inc., In re
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • 20 Agosto 1996
    ...those documents in Ohio" by a non-lawyer constitutes the unauthorized practice of law (citation omitted)); Stark County Bar Ass'n. v. Beaman, 60 Ohio Misc.2d 17, 574 N.E.2d 599, 600 (Bd.Unauth.Prac.1990) ("[T]he trust agreements prepared by respondents, for a fee, significantly affect the l......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT