People ex rel. Chicago Bar Ass'n v. Novotny

• Decision Date: 11 May 1944
• Docket Number: No. 27797.,27797.
• Citation: 54 N.E.2d 536,386 Ill. 536
• Parties: PEOPLE ex rel. CHICAGO BAR ASS'N v. NOVOTNY et al.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

386 Ill. 536

54 N.E.2d 536

PEOPLE ex rel. CHICAGO BAR ASS'N

v.NOVOTNY et al.

No. 27797.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

March 21, 1944.

As Modified on Denial of Rehearing May 11, 1944.

Original contempt proceeding by the People, on the relation of the Chicago Bar Association, against Thomas V. Novotny and another.

Information dismissed as to Herman P. Haase, and Thomas V. Novotny adjudged guilty of contempt.Charles Leviton, of Chicago, for relator.

Thomas V. Novotny, Sr., and Herman P. Haase, pro se, both of Chicago, for respondents.

Myer H. Gladstone, of Chicago, for respondent Novotny on rehearing.

PER CURIAM.

This is an original proceeding brought by the People of the State of Illinois, upon relation of the Chicago Bar Association, against Thomas V. Novotny, Sr., charging him with contempt and holding himself out to be a lawyer admitted or licensed to practice law in the State of Illinois, and practicing law when in fact he is a layman and not authorized so to do. The information also charges that Herman P. Haase was aiding and abetting respondent Novotny in the unauthorized and illegal practice of law, and is also guilty of contempt. Both respondents were by order of this court required to show cause why they should not be punished for contempt, and thereupon both have filed their respective answers in response to such rule entered upon the filing of the information.

The information charges that Novotny maintains and office located at No. 82 West Washington street, Chicago, Illinois; that these offices are shared with Herman P. Haase; that Novotny is a layman and not admitted to practice law; that he has placed upon the doors of his office, and upon his eltterheads, and upon his pleadings words designating he is an attorney at law; that he has also caused his name to be inserted in certain legal directories advertising he is a lawyer; that he has caused certain advertisements and notices to be printed and distributed advertising he is an attorney at law; that he has appeared in a certain cause now pending in this court, in the abstract, brief and argument of which he is designated as attorney for appellant; and that in the suggestions in opposition to the motion for leave to file an information there is shown upon the outside wrapper a designation he is an attorney at law. The information also alleges that at the January term, 1943, of this court he filed a petition to have his name placed upon the roll of attorneys, claiming he was entitled thereto because of a motion claimed to have been made before this court June 22, 1912, based upon a license obtained the State of Minnesota, and that he is now holding himself out as a duly admitted and licensed lawyer in violation of the laws of Illinois, and in contempt of this court, and prays that he may be restrained from further practicing and be punished for contempt.

The answer of respondent Novotny denies he is a layman, and alleges he has been for the past thirty-one years a duly licensed and qualified attorney-at-law in the State of Illinois, and has complied with all of the rules and regulations of this court; admits the specific act of practicing law alleged in the information. He also admits he filed his petition in this court at the January term, 1943, to have his named placed upon the roll of attorneys, and says that he had not been notified of the court denying such right or privilege to have his name placed upon the roll of attorneys, but says he was notified said petition was dismissed as not being sufficient in law, because it did not state facts upon which this court could grant the prayer. He also says he is a graduate of St. Paul's College of Law; that he was admitted to practice law in the State of Minnesota in 1907; that he came to Illinois at the request of another attorney in 1912, and associated himself with another law firm, and that June 22, 1912, upon the motion of two lawyers, and upon presenting to this court a certificate of good moral character, this honorable court instructed the clerk to administer the oath of office, and to enroll his name upon the roll of attorneys of record of this court, and that he did take the oath of office, and in due time a certificate of admission was mailed to and received by respondent.

Further by way of answer he claims that in 1929 a complaint was filed against him in the municipal court of Cook county charging him with the practicing of law without a license, and that upon a trial before a jury he was found not guilty; that for thirty-one years, with the knowledge of the State's Attorney of Cook county, the Attorney General and the Bar Association he had held himself out as a duly licensed and qualified attorney at law, and that he has been authorized to consult with prisoners in the county jail of Cook county as a licensed attorney, and that because for thirty-one years no information has been filed the People have been guilty of laches, and prays that if the court is not...