Title: Richland Cty. Bar Assn. v. Clapp

State: ohio

Issuer: Ohio Supreme Court

Document:

RICHLAND COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION v. CLAPP. 
[Cite as Richland Cty. Bar Assn. v. Clapp (1998), ___ Ohio St.3d ___.] 
Unauthorized practice of law — Individual not authorized to practice law in Ohio 
who prepares and files a motion and pleadings in court on behalf of his 
clients is engaging in the unauthorized practice of law. 
(No. 98-1711 — Submitted October 13, 1998 — Decided December 30, 1998.) 
ON FINAL REPORT of the Board of Commissioners on the Unauthorized Practice of 
Law of the Supreme Court, No. UPL 97-2. 
 
In July 1997, relator, Richland County Bar Association, filed a complaint 
with the Board of Commissioners on the Unauthorized Practice of Law of the 
Supreme Court (“board”), charging that respondent, Robert D. Clapp, had engaged 
in the unauthorized practice of law.  Clapp filed an answer in which he admitted, 
among other things, that he is not an attorney and that he is the Chief Executive 
Officer of Clapp & Affiliates Financial Services, Inc.  The parties subsequently 
filed a stipulation of facts and waiver of hearing pursuant to Gov.Bar R. VII(7)(C). 
 
Based on the parties’ pleadings and stipulated facts, the board found that in 
February 1997, Clapp filed a motion to dismiss in Mansfield Municipal Court on 
behalf of defendants Janine M. Caico and Dennis Caico in Empire Affiliates Credit 
Union, Inc. v. Caico, case No. 96-CVF-4297.  In the motion to dismiss, Clapp 
requested a jury trial and claimed that he was authorized to file the motion based 
on powers of attorney issued by the Caicos for Clapp to act for them in all credit 
matters.  Although Clapp charged the Caicos no specific fee for filing the motion, 
he charged them a commission for his work on their behalf.  Clapp filed a total of 
three pleadings in the twelve-month period preceding the parties’ stipulation of 
facts in this proceeding.  Clapp admitted that his conduct in preparing and filing 
pleadings and other legal documents constituted the unauthorized practice of law. 
 
2
 
In August 1998, the board filed its final report.  The board concluded that 
Clapp had engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.  The board recommended 
that the court issue an order finding that Clapp had engaged in the unauthorized 
practice of law, prohibiting Clapp from engaging in such unauthorized practice of 
law in the future, and providing for the reimbursement of costs and expenses 
incurred by relator. 
 
After the filing of the board’s final report, we issued an order permitting 
Clapp to show cause why the report should not be confirmed and an appropriate 
order granted.  Gov.Bar R. VII(19)(A).  Clapp did not file any objections to the 
report. 
 
This cause is now before the court for its determination under Gov.Bar R. 
VII(19)(D). 
__________________ 
 
 
Brown, Bemiller, Murray & McIntyre and Wm. Travis McIntyre, for relator. 
 
Robert Clapp, pro se. 
__________________ 
 
Per Curiam.  We adopt the findings and recommendation of the board.  
“The unauthorized practice of law is the rendering of legal services for another by 
any person not admitted to practice in Ohio  * * *.”  Gov.Bar R. VII(2)(A).  The 
practice of law “includes the conduct of litigation and those activities which are 
incidental to appearances in court.”  Akron Bar Assn. v. Greene (1997), 77 Ohio 
St.3d 279, 280, 673 N.E.2d 1307, 1308.  The practice of law consequently 
“embraces the preparation of pleadings and other papers incident to actions and 
special proceedings and the management of such actions and proceedings on 
behalf of clients before judges and courts * * *.”  Land Title Abstract & Trust Co. 
 
3
v. Dworken (1934), 129 Ohio St. 23, 1 O.O. 313, 193 N.E. 650, paragraph one of 
the syllabus; see, also, Cincinnati Bar Assn. v. Estep (1995), 74 Ohio St.3d 172, 
173, 657 N.E.2d 499, 500. 
 
As the board correctly concluded and Clapp conceded, his filing of a motion 
and pleadings in court on behalf of his clients constituted the unauthorized 
practice of law.  The powers of attorney executed by the Caicos did not permit 
Clapp, a non-attorney, to file the motion to dismiss in municipal court.  See 
Greene, 77 Ohio St.3d at 279-280, 673 N.E.2d at 1308. 
 
Based on the foregoing, we find that Clapp engaged in the unauthorized 
practice of law.  We enjoin Clapp from preparing, on behalf of clients, pleadings, 
motions, and other legal documents to be filed in any Ohio court. 
 
All costs and expenses of this action are taxed to Clapp. 
Judgment accordingly. 
 
MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and 
LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur.