Case Name: Toledo Bar Association v. Palmer
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 2000-12-27
Citations: 90 Ohio St. 3d 458
Docket Number: No. 00-1140
Parties: Toledo Bar Association v. Palmer.
Judges: Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, Third Service
Volume: 90
Pages: 458–459

Head Matter:
Toledo Bar Association v. Palmer.
[Cite as Toledo Bar Assn. v. Palmer (2000), 90 Ohio St.3d 458.]
(No. 00-1140
Submitted August 22, 2000
Decided December 27, 2000.)
Jonathan B. Cherry; Bugbee & Conkle and Gregory B. Denny, for relator.
Edward E. Palmer, pro se.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
We adopt the findings, conclusion, and recommendation of the board. The unauthorized practice of law consists of "the rendering of legal services for another by any person not admitted to practice in Ohio ." Gov.Bar R. VII(2)(A). We have held that the practice of law "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." Akron Bar Assn. v. Greene (1997), 77 Ohio St.3d 279, 280, 673 N.E.2d 1307, 1308.
Respondent prepared and filed a complaint, a motion, and an answer on behalf of three separate clients. In one instance, respondent explicitly represented himself as defendant's attorney in a motion that he prepared, and subsequently filed, to withdraw as counsel. In light of the fact that respondent is not a licensed attorney in Ohio, his actions clearly constitute the unauthorized practice of law. Respondent is hereby enjoined from further engaging in these or similar actions. Costs are taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.
Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.