Carter v. Brien
| Decision Date | 30 November 1956 |
| Citation | 309 S.W.2d 748 |
| Parties | Nolan CARTER, Chalrman, Kentucky State Bar Association's Committee on Unauthorized Practice, Complainant, v. W. J. BRIEN, Jr., Clerk, Marshall County Court, Benton, Ky., Respondent. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky |
R. P. Moloney, Jr., Lexington, for complainant.
John C. Lovett, Benton, for respondent.
% per curiam/.
This is a companion case to Nolan Carter, etc., against B. L. Trevathan, this day decided. The only difference between the two cases is that here W. J. Brien, Clerk of the Marshall County Court, who is not a lawyer, is charged with the unauthorized practice of law in that he prepared and filed in the Marshall County Court seven petitions for probate of wills and appointment of administrators set out in the petition the Bar Association filed against him, while Trevathan was charged with writing four deeds for various persons. A rule was issued by the clerk of this court against Brien under RCA 3.520 to show cause, if any he could, why he should not be punished for contempt of this court for engaging in the unauthorized practice of law.
The response filed by Brien, supported by his affidavit, as well as the affidavits of the county judge and the county attorney, is to the effect he only filled in the blanks of certain forms kept in his office which were then signed by the applicant as his own attorney. Brien made no charges for his services and insists he acted only as an amanuensis at the instance of the county attorney, the county judge or some other attorney. Brien says he did not intend to, and did not, engage in the practice of law and would not have prepared these papers had he known there were any objections to his so doing.
There is a 'joint motion' signed by Brien's attorney and the attorney representing the Bar Association asking that respondent be held in contempt of this court and fined $1 and court cost; that the complaint be dismissed as to three of the matters complained of in the petition, because the applications for appointment of administrators in these three instances were prepared in the presence of the county attorney and at his direction. But the attorney representing the Bar Association did not join in and resists that part of the motion asking that respondent not be required to pay the expense the Bar Association incurred in investigating the charges against him.
What was written in the Trevathan opinion, and the authorities there cited, apply with equal force here. When...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kentucky State Bar Ass'n v. First Federal Sav. and Loan Ass'n of Covington
...As justification for this ruling see Hargett v. Lake, Ky., 305 S.W.2d 523; Carter v. Trevathan, Ky., 309 S.W.2d 746; Carter v. Brien, Ky., 309 S.W.2d 748; In re Sparks, 267 Ky. 93, 101 S.W.2d 194; People ex rel. Illinois State Bar Ass'n v. People's Stock Yards State Bank, 344 Ill. 462, 176 ......
-
Ky. Bar Ass'n v. Brooks
...non-attorneys from practicing law without a license. See, e.g.,325 S.W.3d 285Hargett v. Lake, 305 S.W.2d 523 (Ky.1957); Carter v. Brien, 309 S.W.2d 748 (Ky.1956); Hobson v. Kentucky Trust Co. of Louisville, 303 Ky. 493, 197 S.W.2d 454 (Ky.1946); Kentucky State Bar Ass'n v. First Fed. Sav. &......
-
Federal Intermediate Credit Bank of Louisville v. Kentucky Bar Ass'n
...into declaring that when a typist copies a property description into a deed or mortgage form she is practicing law. Cf. Carter v. Brien, Ky., 309 S.W.2d 748, 749 (1956). It is the person for whom she is doing the work, and who will pass upon and cause the completed product to be presented f......
-
Frazee v. Citizens Fidelity Bank & Trust Co.
...unauthorized practice of law when done voluntarily by persons without a beneficial interest in the corpus of the estate. Carter v. Brien, Ky., 309 S.W.2d 748 (1956); Winkenhofer v. Chaney, Ky., 369 S.W.2d 113 (1963). Fiduciaries are in no different position, with respect to practice of law,......