Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T03:57:11.922Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

California’s Nonlawyer Lawyer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

William R. Slomanson
William R. Slomanson*
Affiliation:
Professor of Law, Western State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Current Developments
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 81 , Issue 4 , October 1987 , pp. 956 - 957
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Bluestein v. State Bar, 13 Cal.2d 162, 174, 529 P.2d 599, 118 Cal. Rptr. 175 (1974).

2 Rule 988 has been published in the official California Reports (43 Cal.3d) and will be published in West’s annotated California Civil and Criminal Rules. It is reprinted in 26 ILM 980 (1987). Inquiries about applications may be directed to the Office of Professional Standards of the State Bar of California.

The author thanks Deborah Fulton, Staff Attorney, for providing copies of Rule 988 and various documents filed with the California Supreme Court in support of its adoption.

3 See 10th Anniversary Nears for Legal Consultants, N.Y.L.J., Jan. 4, 1984, at 1, col. 4 (only 70 licensed consultants in New York, all located in New York City). For the New York rule, see 22 N.Y.C.R.R. pt. 521, reprinted in 26 ILM 996 (1987).

4 See Slomanson, , California Becomes Latest State to Consider “Foreign Legal Consultant,” 80 AJIL 197(1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 See Slomanson, , Foreign Legal Consultant: Multistate Model for Business and the Bar, 39 ALB. L. Rev. 199 (1975)Google Scholar.

6 In re Adoption of Proposed Rule 988, 43 Cal.3d 534, 535–36, 737 P.2d 768, 237 Cal. Rptr. 565 (1987) (Bird, C.J., dissenting) (emphasis in original).

7 In addition to those of California, supra note 2, and New York, supra note 3, the foreign legal consultant rules of Japan and the District of Columbia are reprinted in 26 ILM at 881 and 986, respectively.

8 The author’s review of federal and state LEXIS libraries revealed no reference to foreign legal consultants or RFLCs.

9 See Comment, , International Legal Practice Restrictions on the Migrant Attorney, 15 Harv. Int’l L.J. 298 (1974)Google Scholar; and Comment, , Foreign Branches of Law Firms: The Development of Lawyers Equipped to Handle International Practice, 80 Harv. L. Rev. 1284 (1967)Google Scholar.