Wash. R. Limi. Lic. Leg. Tech. Pro. Cond. LLLT RPC 5.5
Wash. R. Limi. Lic. Leg. Tech. Pro. Cond. LLLT RPC 5.5
Comments
[1] Lawyer RPC 5.5(a) expresses the basic prohibition on a legal practitioner practicing law in a jurisdiction where that individual is not specifically licensed or otherwise authorized to practice law. It reflects the general notion (enforced through criminal-legal prohibitions and other law) that legal services may be provided only by those licensed to do so. This limitation on the ability to practice law is designed to protect the public against the rendition of legal services by unqualified persons. See Comment [2] to Lawyer RPC 5.5.
As applied to LLLTs, this principle should apply with equal force. An actively licensed LLLT should practice law as an LLLT only in a jurisdiction where they are licensed to do so, i.e., Washington State. An LLLT must not practice law in a jurisdiction where they are not authorized to do so. Unless and until other jurisdictions authorize Washington-licensed LLLTs to practice law, it will be unethical under this Rule for the LLLT to provide or attempt to provide legal services extraterritorially. Relatedly, it is unethical to assist anyone in activities that constitute the unauthorized practice of law in any jurisdiction. See also APR 28(H)(6) (prohibiting an LLLT from providing services to a client in connection with a legal matter in another state unless permitted by the laws of that state to perform the services for the client).
[2] Lawyer RPC 5.5(b) through (d) define the circumstances in which lawyers can practice in Washington despite being unlicensed here. For example, lawyers actively licensed elsewhere may provide services on a temporary basis in Washington in association with a lawyer admitted to practice here or when the lawyer's activities "arise out of or are reasonably related to the lawyer's practice in their home jurisdiction." These provisions also recognize that certain non-Washington-licensed lawyers may practice here on more than a temporary basis (e.g., lawyers providing services authorized by federal law), and otherwise prohibit non-Washington-licensed lawyers from establishing a systematic and continuous presence in Washington for the practice of law.
These provisions are, at this time, unnecessary in the LLLT RPC because there are no limited licenses in other jurisdictions tantamount to Washington's LLLT rules and no need to authorize limited license practitioners in other jurisdictions to practice law in Washington, either temporarily or on an ongoing basis. For this reason, paragraphs (b) through (d) are reserved.