Greedy Lawyers - Posted by Jack (Ky)

Posted by Redline on March 30, 1999 at 11:34:52:

Here in NJ a similair thing was tried some time ago and failed. Instead, realtors must now “warn” buyers (and make then sign a form) that says they SHOULD use a lawyer and if they DON’T it’s their own fault.

I have no problems with that. It turns out in the northen part of most of the state, lawyers are used alot. In the southern part of the state (and west) … title companies are used mostly. Weird.

I can’t see how this kinda stuff can win, but then again … “our” Supreme Court is WAY, WAY outta touch.


Greedy Lawyers - Posted by Jack (Ky)

Posted by Jack (Ky) on March 30, 1999 at 10:57:21:

I recently became aware of a move by my state’s Bar Association to require that all real-estate closings be in the presence of a lawyer. This idea failed two years ago, but they’re at it again.

Evidence against the law includes a Virginia study that found that closing without lawyers saved the parties involved money. Duh. The Bar Association maintains that folks could get burned in complex deals unless a lawyer is present. Duh, again.

But what about the deals that lack complexity, and thus do not necessitate the presence of said lawyer? This law would prevent kitchen closing unless Larry Lawyer is at the table.
Who needs that? And more to the point, who benefits most by that? Certainly not the folks doing the deal.

The state Supreme Court will make a ruling on this soon, and it should go against the Bar Association–this time.

I am wondering if any other state has attempted or even passed such a statute.

Jack Stivers