Nature Of Services Research Articles

Until fairly recently it had apparently been the general practice of motor clubs to furnish their members with certain services of a legal nature in connection with their memberships or contracts.1 Since I93i a number of cases have arisen in which it has been charged that the automobile clubs in rendering these services are engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.2 In all of the cases which have been brought to the courts of last resort-except in one instance3-this charge has been sustained4 against the motor clubs. Usually no emphasis has been placed upon any particular type of service rendered by the clubs, but the courts have simply found that the practices as a whole constituted unauthorized practice of law. On this account it has been deemed unnecessary to deal separately with the specific services rendered by each motor club in the discussion of the individual decisions. All of the clubs involved in these cases had been providing for defense of members in magistrate and police courts for minor charges under the motor vehicle laws, and some even handled more serious charges, such as manslaughter. Most of them also were prepared to give legal advice to their members on matters with reference to the use or ownership of their automobiles, and to defend property damage suits brought against members as a. result of collisions. Some had provisions for defense of personal injury claims and for prosecution of civil claims, and at least one provided for prosecution of criminal charges on behalf of members in courts without regular prosecuting attorneys.5 * A.B., 1935, Gettysburg College. Now a member of the third year class in the Duke University Law School. Member of the Editorial Board, Duke Bar Association Journal. 1 Results of private investigation indicate that these practices are being continued, apparently without active disapproval on the part of the bar, in at least a few of the states whose courts have not considered the question. 2People ex rel. Chicago Bar Association v. Motorists' Association of Illinois, 354 Ill. 595, I88 N. E. 827 (I933); People ex rel. Chicago Bar Association v. Chicago Motor Club, 362 Ill. 50, I99 N. E. i (i935); In re Maclub of America, 3 N. E. (2d) 272 (Mass. 1936); In re Thibodeau, 3 N. E. (2d) 749 (Mass. 1936); State ex rel. Seawell v. Carolina Motor Club, 209 N. C. 624, I84 S. E. 540 (1936); Rhode Island Bar Association v. Automobile Service Association, 55 R. I. 122, 179 Atl. 139 (I935); Yeats v. Automobile Owners Association of Florida, BRAND, UNAUTHORIZED PRACnCE DECISIONS (1937) 326 (C. C. Fla. I934); Schuur v. Detroit Automobile Club, id. at 698 (C. C. Mich. 1937); Goodman v. Motorists' Alliance, 29 Ohio N. P. (N. S.) 3I (C. P. 1931); Dworken v. Cleveland Auto Club, 29 Ohio N. P. (N. S.) 607 (C. P. 1931). 'In re Thibodeau, supra note 2. 4Several cases have arisen also in the lower courts of Ohio (Goodman v. Motorists' Alliance, and Dworken v. Cleveland Auto Club, both supra note 2), and one in a Florida lower court (Yeats v. Automobile Owners Association of Florida, supra note 2), in all of which injunctions were granted against incorporated motor clubs which were furnishing legal services. 6 State ex rel. Seawell v. Carolina Motor Club, supra note 2.