Only a few years ago, multistate practice issues were something only sprawling megafirms concerned themselves with. Increased mobility of attorneys and clients, however, has in recent years stretched the limits of statutes and rules of law developed for an era when it took a week to cross Colorado on horseback. And, while the Internet certainly can't claim to have created multistate practice ethics issues by itself, it has dramatically increased interstate legal business to the point where even a sole practitioner should know something about ethics issues regarding multistate legal practice. It is a logical starting point, however. The definition of the practice of law is established by law and varies from one jurisdiction to another.
Few attorneys engage exclusively in matters involving only Colorado parties and property.
Certainly the mere fact that some party to a transaction regarding which an attorney is rendering legal advice is not from Colorado, or that the transaction involves property located outside of Colorado, does not require the attorney to be licensed in every state in which each party to the transaction is a resident, or in each jurisdiction in which the goods presently reside, or through which they may pass. But don't count on it. U.S. government lawyers, and attorneys engaged in matters exclusively involving federal law, e.g., prosecution of a patent, are typically exempt from state attorney licensing requirements. Not too much should be read into Sperry, however, since very few matters solely involve the application of federal law. For example, while the Patent Act unquestionably preempts states from granting patents, it does not preempt state law regarding patent license agreements.