Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1685962
 


 



Lobbying and Litigating Against 'Legal Bootleggers' - The Role of the Organized Bar in the Expansion of the Courts' Inherent Powers in the Early Twentieth Century


Laurel Rigertas


Northern Illinois University

October 15, 2009

California Western Law Review, Vol. 46, No. 1, p. 65, Fall 2009

Abstract:     
This article examines the historical origins of the judiciary’s inherent power to define the practice of law and argues that the origins of the doctrine might be more grounded in the economic concerns of the legal profession than in the separation of powers doctrine. The organized bar first focused on curbing unauthorized practice in the 1920s. At that time, its main strategy was to lobby state legislatures to define the practice of law. These efforts were largely unsuccessful and by the mid-1920s legislative reform efforts waned. The organized bar renewed its efforts to curb the unauthorized practice of law after the start of the Great Depression in the 1930s. Rather than lobbying legislatures to define the practice of law as it did in the 1920s, however, it changed its strategy and began litigating the issue. In its shift in strategy, the organized bar suddenly contended that trying to define the practice of law would be unwise. Furthermore, citing the separation of powers delineated in the state constitutions, the bar shifted course and now argued that it would be unconstitutional for legislatures to define the practice of law because that was an exclusive power of the judicial branch. The new strategy succeeded and resulted in case law that expanded the inherent powers of the state judiciaries to include the power to define the practice of law.

Evidence suggests the organized bar did not abandon its legislative reform efforts because of concerns about the separation of powers. Instead, the bar might have shifted strategy out of concern that other interest groups, such as realtors, could successfully counter their legislative lobbying efforts, undermining the organized bar’s effort to gain a definition of the practice of law favorable to its economic interests. The shift in the organized bar’s strategy, and the timing of the shift, raises the question of whether the courts’ inherent power to define the practice of law has a solid mandate from the state constitutions and the separation of powers doctrine, or whether the power developed to serve protectionist interests of a private trade group - the bar - which had the cooperation of the judiciary due to their shared membership in the legal profession.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 72

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: October 2, 2010  

Suggested Citation

Rigertas, Laurel, Lobbying and Litigating Against 'Legal Bootleggers' - The Role of the Organized Bar in the Expansion of the Courts' Inherent Powers in the Early Twentieth Century (October 15, 2009). California Western Law Review, Vol. 46, No. 1, p. 65, Fall 2009. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1685962

Contact Information

Laurel Rigertas (Contact Author)
Northern Illinois University ( email )
1425 W. Lincoln Hwy
Dekalb, IL 60115-2828
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 314
Downloads: 52
Download Rank: 234,606

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.234 seconds