Unauthorized Practice of Law (UPL) Restrictions

Many settlement service providers offer one-stop shopping programs that include closing services that may involve notary or signing services necessary to execute documents necessary to purchase property or borrow money where real estate is the security for the loan.

The legal profession in certain states has advocated the passage of state bar opinions or legislation tht expands the definition of what constitutes the "practice of law" in that state, which effectively bans non-attorneys from conducting certain closing services.  Sometimes, these UPL restrictions unnecessarily preclude RESPRO® members from doing business in certain states.  To view RESPRO®'s position on UPL restrictions, click here. 

RESPRO® Products and Services

• RESPRO® members can join RESPRO®'s State Issues Task Force that meets monthly to discuss pending UPL and other state developments by contacting Sue Johnson.

Other Information

• Vendor Management Company Wins "Unauthorized Practice of Law" Case (April 2009)
• Department of Justice Web Site Page on Real Estate Rebate Law (October 21, 2008)
• South Carolina Supreme Court Rules That Attorneys Must Disburse Loan Proceeds (2006)
• Delaware Supreme Court Says Non-Lawyers Cannot Disburse Funds at Closing (September 2006)
• Illinois Supreme Court Rules That Non-Lawyers Can Do Doc Prep (2005)
• West Virginia Court Asks Lower Court to Define UPL Violations in that State (2005)
• Ohio Supreme Court Declares Only Attorneys May Prepare Deeds (2003)
• Georgia Supreme Court Upholds UPL Restriction (2003)
• Kentucky Attorneys Not Required at Closings (2003)
• Virginia Clarifies Treatment of Doc Prep Fees (2002)
• Illinois Real Estate Lawyers Association (IRELA) v. Koenig and Strey, Consent Decree on Unauthorized Practice of Law (UPL), Circuit Court of Cook County (2001)
• Lenders Cannot Charge Borrowers a Doc Prep Fee, Michigan Court Rules (2001)
• Massachusetts Court Says That Issuing Title Policies is Unauthorized Practice of Law (2001)