Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

attorneycorporation

attorneycorporationrespondent

Related Cases

People ex rel. Chicago Bar Ass’n v. Motorists’ Ass’n of Ill., 354 Ill. 595, 188 N.E. 827

Facts

The Motorists' Association of Illinois was incorporated in 1925 as a non-profit organization. It operated a motor club and provided various services to its members, including legal services through a legal department. Despite denying that it engaged in the practice of law, the association advertised legal services and employed attorneys to assist members with legal matters related to automobile claims. The Chicago Bar Association filed a complaint against the association for practicing law without a license.

For a number of years respondent has been engaged in operating a motor club, and its business has covered a large portion of this state. It has approximately fifty thousand so-called members or persons to whom it furnishes automobile insurance and other services.

Issue

Did the Motorists' Association of Illinois engage in the unauthorized practice of law, and should it be held in contempt for such actions?

Rule

Corporations are prohibited from practicing law, and this prohibition applies even to corporations organized not for profit. The court has the authority to determine who may practice law and to punish unauthorized practice.

Although respondent denies that its conduct constituted the practice of law, its principal contention is that it is entitled to practice law by virtue of the fact that it is a corporation organized ‘not for profit,’ and that it is therefore not prohibited from practicing law.

Analysis

The court analyzed the services provided by the Motorists' Association and concluded that they constituted the practice of law. Despite the association's claims of being a non-profit organization, the court referenced previous rulings that established that corporations cannot be licensed to practice law. The evidence presented showed that the association had been providing legal services to its members, which was in direct violation of the law.

It requires no discussion to demonstrate that the services so rendered by respondent for its members, through the attorneys employed by respondent, are legal services.

Conclusion

The court found the Motorists' Association of Illinois guilty of contempt for practicing law without a license and ordered it to pay a fine of $1,000 and costs.

It is therefore ordered that respondent be held in contempt of this court, and that it pay to the clerk of this court a fine of $1,000 and costs of this suit.

Who won?

The Chicago Bar Association prevailed in this case as the court upheld its claim against the Motorists' Association for practicing law without a license.

The court found the Motorists' Association guilty of contempt and directed to pay fine and costs in accordance with opinion.

You must be

Log In to Casey

Sign Up to Casey

Reset Your Password

Keywords

Related Cases

Faison v. Thornton, 863 F.Supp. 1204

People v. Fentress, 103 Misc.2d 179, 425 N.Y.S.2d 485

Winship v. Gem City Bone & Joint, P.C., 185 P.3d 1252, 2008 WY 68

Knight v. Aqui, 966 F.Supp.2d 989

In re Marriage of Hoffman, 867 N.W.2d 26