Lorain Cty. Bar Assn. v. Kennedy - Ohio Supreme Court Opinion - Ohio Supreme Court Decision

	ROMINGER LEGAL
		Ohio Court Cases and Opinions - Ohio Legal Research
					Need Legal Help?
					Need Legal Help?
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER
LEGAL RESEARCH CENTER			LEGAL HEADLINES - CASE LAW - LEGAL FORMS	NOT FINDING WHAT YOU NEED? -RESEARCH

This court case was taken from the web sites of the Ohio Courts. Search our site for more cases - CLICK HERE

LEGAL RESEARCH

COURT REPORTERS

PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS

PROCESS SERVERS

DOCUMENT RETRIEVERS

EXPERT WITNESSES

Find a Private Investigator

Find an Expert Witness

Find a Process Server

Case Law - save on Lexis / WestLaw.

Legal News - Legal Headlines

[Cite as Lorain Cty. Bar Assn. v. Kennedy, 95 Ohio St.3d 116, 2002-Ohio-1943.]

LORAIN COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION v. KENNEDY.
[Cite as Lorain Cty. Bar Assn. v. Kennedy (2002), 95 Ohio St.3d 116.]
Unauthorized practice of law -- Individual not licensed to practice law in Ohio
prepared two quitclaim deed forms for another individual --
Engagement in the unauthorized practice of law enjoined.
(No. 01-2193 -- Submitted January 30, 2002 -- Decided April 24, 2002.)
ON FINAL REPORT of the Board of Commissioners on the Unauthorized Practice
of Law of the Supreme Court, No. UPL009.

Per Curiam. In February 2000, respondent, Renee Kennedy, a notary
public in Savannah, Ohio, prepared and notarized in advance two quitclaim deeds
which had not been signed by the grantor or witnesses. On November 20, 2000,
relator, Lorain County Bar Association, filed a complaint charging that by
preparing the quitclaim deeds, respondent, who is not and has never been a
lawyer, was engaging in the unauthorized practice of law. Respondent admitted
that she had filled out the quitclaim deed forms but denied that she had practiced
law. Respondent also admitted that she had notarized the quitclaim deeds before
they were submitted to the grantor.

The matter was submitted to the Board of Commissioners on the
Unauthorized Practice of Law ("board"). Based on the stipulations of the parties
and a deposition of the proposed grantor, the board found the facts as stated and
concluded that respondent's conduct did constitute the practice of law and
recommended that she be enjoined from such further activities.

On review, we accept the facts as stipulated. Based upon our holding in
Land Title Abstract & Trust Co. v. Dworken (1934), 129 Ohio St. 23, 1 O.O. 313,
193 N.E. 650, we said in Disciplinary Counsel v. Doan (1997), 77 Ohio St.3d
236, 237, 673 N.E.2d 1272, that "the practice of law embraces the preparation of

SUPREME COURT OF OHIO
legal documents on another's behalf, including deeds which convey real
property." In preparing quitclaim deeds, respondent was engaged in the practice
of law.

Of importance to us, although not related to respondent's practice of law,
is her neglect of her duty as a notary. A notary, under R.C. 147.07, has the power
to administer oaths and take and certify acknowledgements of deeds. This is an
important responsibility. As we said in Lorain Cty. Bar Assn. v. Papcke (1998),
81 Ohio St.3d 91, 93, 689 N.E.2d 549, "Documents acknowledged by [a notary]
are self-authenticating. Evid.R. 902(8); Fed.R.Evid. 902(8). A notary who
certifies to the affidavit of a person without administering the oath or affirmation
to that person as required by R.C. 147.14 is subject to a fine of up to $100 or
imprisonment of up to thirty days, or both. R.C. 147.99(B)." For that reason, we
recognized that notaries "must not take a cavalier attitude toward their notary
responsibilities and acknowledge the signature of persons who have not appeared
before them." Papcke at 93, 689 N.E.2d 549.

Respondent is hereby enjoined from further acts that constitute the
practice of law. Costs are taxed to respondent.
Judgment accordingly.

MOYER, C.J., DOUGLAS, RESNICK, F.E. SWEENEY, PFEIFER, COOK and
LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., concur.
__________________

Marillyn Fagan Damelio, for relator.

Mary Ann Rabin, for respondent.
__________________
2