Can a lawyer delegate the closing of a real estate transaction to a nonlawyer?

Plain-English summary

The opinion answered whether a lawyer may delegate the closing of real estate transactions to a nonlawyer. The Board concluded that closing a real estate transaction constitutes the practice of law as defined by O.C.G.A. 15-19-50, so it would be ethically improper for a lawyer to permit a nonlawyer to close such transactions.

The Board explained that the answer turned on what it means to close a transaction. If closing is defined as the entire series of events through which title is conveyed from one party to another, it would be improper for a nonlawyer to close the transaction. The Board relied on the statutory definition of the practice of law, which includes conveyancing, giving legal advice, and any action taken for others in a matter connected with the law, and on Georgia Bar Association v. Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation, 222 Ga. 657 (1966), which characterized closing real estate transactions as the rendering of legal services and advice. The Board added that to the extent any legal advice is given during the closing, that itself is the practice of law and could not be delegated.

The Board drew on earlier State Bar Advisory Opinions 19 and 21 to describe the supervision required for tasks that may be delegated: the lawyer must maintain a direct relationship with the client, supervise and direct the delegated work, and assume complete ultimate professional responsibility, with supervision that is direct and constant. The Board concluded that while certain tasks may be delegated under that supervision, the lawyer may not delegate to a nonlawyer the responsibility to close the transaction without the participation of an attorney.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1989, before the State Bar of Georgia's 2001 adoption of the Georgia Rules of Professional Conduct, which replaced the former Standards of Conduct. Per the opinion's headnotes, Standard 24 and the cited Disciplinary Rules correspond to current Rule 5.5(a), and EC 3-6 to Rule 5.3(b). Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis; the closing-presence principle was later applied in Formal Advisory Opinions 00-3 and 13-1 and revisited for video conferencing in FAO 23-1 (2025). Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can a nonlawyer close a real estate transaction in Georgia?

A: No. The opinion concluded that closing a real estate transaction is the practice of law under O.C.G.A. 15-19-50, so it is ethically improper for a lawyer to permit a nonlawyer to close such transactions.

Q: Can a lawyer delegate any closing tasks to a paralegal?

A: Yes, the opinion recognized that certain tasks may be delegated, but only under the direct and constant supervision described in State Bar Advisory Opinion 21, with the lawyer assuming ultimate professional responsibility. The responsibility to close the transaction itself may not be delegated.

Q: Why is a real estate closing treated as the practice of law?

A: The opinion relied on the statutory definition of the practice of law, which includes conveyancing and any action taken for others in a matter connected with the law, and on Georgia case law characterizing real estate closings as the rendering of legal services and advice.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interpreted former Standard of Conduct 24 (aiding the unauthorized practice of law), Canon III, and several Ethical Considerations and Disciplinary Rules. The State Bar of Georgia's headnotes map these to current Rule 5.5(a) (Model Rule 5.5) and Rule 5.3 (Model Rule 5.3). It relied on O.C.G.A. 15-19-50 and Georgia Bar Association v. Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation, 222 Ga. 657 (1966), and on State Bar Advisory Opinions 19 and 21.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Former Standard 24 (aiding the unauthorized practice of law), now Georgia RPC 5.5(a) / Model Rule 5.5
• EC 3-6, now Georgia RPC 5.3(b) / Model Rule 5.3

Statutes:

• O.C.G.A. 15-19-50 (definition of the practice of law)

Cases:

• Georgia Bar Association v. Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation, 222 Ga. 657 (1966), real estate closings as legal services

Other opinions cited:

• State Bar Advisory Opinions 19 and 21: delegation to and supervision of nonlawyers

See also

• GA Ethics Op. 00-3: Real Estate Closings by Telephone
• GA Ethics Op. 23-1: Real Estate Closings by Video
• GA Ethics Op. 04-1: Real Estate Closing Proceeds and IOLTA

Source

• Landing page: https://www.gabar.org/handbook?rule=rule505

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

State Bar of Georgia
Issued by the Supreme Court of Georgia
On May 12, 1989
Formal Advisory Opinion No. 86-5

For references to Standard of Conduct 24, please see Rule 5.5(a) .

For references to Rule 3-103 (Canon III) please see Rule 5.5(a) .

For references to EC 3-1, please see Comment 2 of Rule 5.5 .

For references to EC 3-2, please see Rule 1.1 and Comment 5 of Rule 1.1 .

For references to EC 3-6, please see Rule 5.3(b) and Comment 1 of Rule 5.3 .

For references to DR 3-101(A), please see Rule 5.5(a) .

For references to DR 3-102(A), please see Rule 5.4(a) .

For references to DR 3-103, please see Rule 5.4(b) .

For an explanation regarding the addition of headnotes to the opinion, click here .

Ethical Propriety of Lawyer's Delegating to Nonlawyers the Closing of Real Estate Transactions.

The closing of real estate transaction constitutes the practice of law as defined by O.C.G.A § 15-19-50. Accordingly, it would be ethically improper for lawyers to permit nonlawyers to close real estate transactions. Certain tasks can be delegated to nonlawyers, subject to the type of supervision and control outlined in State Bar Advisory Opinion No. 21. The lawyer cannot, however, delegate to a nonlawyer the responsibility to "close "the real estate transaction without the participation of an attorney.

Correspondent asks whether it is ethically permissible for a lawyer to delegate to a nonlawyer the closing of real estate transactions. This question involves, among other things, an interpretation of Standard 24, Rule 3-103 (Canon III), EC 3-1, EC 3-2, EC 3-6, DR 3-101 (A), DR 3-102 (A), and DR 3-103. With the exception of Standard 24, all of the foregoing Ethical Considerations and Directory Rules are cited and quoted in State Bar Advisory Opinion No. 21 (attached hereto).

Standard 24 provides as follows:

A lawyer shall not aid a nonlawyer in the unauthorized practice of law. A violation of this Standard may be punished by a public reprimand.

As the role of nonlawyers (particularly paralegals and legal secretaries) in the closing of real estate transactions has expanded in recent years, questions have arisen as to the scope of duties which can be delegated to nonlawyers. A general discussion of duties which may ethically be delegated to nonlawyers can be found in State Bar Advisory Opinion Nos. 19 and 21. In short, those Advisory Opinions stress that

Avoidance of charges that the paralegal is engaging in the unauthorized practice of law may be achieved only by strict observance of the direction found in EC 3-6, quoted above, indicating that delegation of activities which ordinarily comprise the practice of law is proper only if the lawyer maintains a direct relationship with the client involved, supervises and directs the work delegated to the paralegal and assumes complete ultimate professional responsibility for the work product produced by the paralegal. Supervision of the work of the paralegal by the attorney must be direct and constant to avoid any charges of aiding the unauthorized practice of law. State Bar Advisory Opinion No. 21 .

The question to be addressed in this opinion is whether the closing of a real estate transaction constitutes "the practice of law." This in turn depends upon what it means to "close "a real estate transaction. If the "closing" is defined as the entire series of events through which title to the land is conveyed from one party to another party, it would be ethically improper for a nonlawyer to "close "a real estate transaction.

O.C.G.A. § 15-19-50 states that the "practice of law "includes "conveyancing," "the giving of any legal advice," and "any action taken for others in any matter connected with the law." In Georgia Bar Association v. Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation , 222 Ga. 657 (1966), the Georgia Supreme Court characterizes the "closing of real estate transactions between applicants for title insurance and third persons "as the rendering of legal services and advice. Moreover, to the extent that any legal advice is given during any part of the closing, this would constitute "the practice of law "by definition and could not be ethically delegated to nonlawyers.

In light of all of the foregoing, it appears that the closing of real estate transactions constitutes the practice of law as defined by O.C.G.A. 15-19-50. Accordingly, pursuant to Standard 24, Canon III, and the Ethical Considerations and Disciplinary Rules cited above, it would be ethically improper for a lawyer to aid nonlawyers to "close "real estate transactions. This does not mean that certain tasks cannot be delegated to nonlawyers, subject to the type of supervision and control outlined in State Bar Advisory Opinion No. 21. The lawyer cannot, however, delegate to a nonlawyer the responsibility to "close "the real estate transaction without the participation of an attorney.