This summer at the Legal Hackers Congress in Brooklyn, Kathryn Hume of Fast Forward Labs said that, if recent case law is any indicator, North Carolina is going to play a significant role in the development of unauthorized practice and artificial intelligence jurisprudence.
Combine Kathryn’s statement, a recent ethics opinion out of South Carolina about Avvo, and the joint comments by the FTC and Department of Justice on North Carolina’s proposed legislation on the definition of the “practice of law” and it’s clear that both Carolinas have heavily contributed (or detracted!) to the developing jurisprudence on the future of law. Keeping all of this straight can be a challenge.
Below the quiz I’ve included a key of the different cases, opinions, and other relevant documents that have come out of the Carolinas in the last few years and quotes from each. It’s your job to select the correct case for the relevant quote. Good luck!
Let’s get started!
Lola v. Skadden:
Second Circuit Holds that Document Review performed in North Carolina Is Not Per Se Practice of Law Under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The FTC and DOJ sent a letter in response to an inquiry from North Carolina Senator Bill Cook regarding the impending enactment of North Carolina House Bill 436, legislation that would exclude online interactive legal forms from the definition of the practice of law.
S.C. Opinion 09-10:
Lawyers may, under certain circumstances, be responsible for reviews left about them on third party websites.
South Carolina Supreme Court approves LegalZoom’s business practices.
S.C. Opinion 16-06:
A “fixed-fee legal referral service” offered by “an attorney directory website” violates South Carolina ethics rules related to advertising and splitting fees.
Access to Justice Commission:
The reinvigoration of the South Carolina Access to Justice Commission to expand access to legal services to the people of South Carolina.