In Kentucky, how may an out-of-state lawyer practice in the state courts, and may a non-lawyer represent a corporation outside small claims court?

Plain-English summary

Prompted by a "rash of incidents," the Committee addressed two questions it considered basic: how a lawyer licensed elsewhere may practice in Kentucky courts, and whether a non-lawyer may represent a corporation outside small claims court.

On the first, the opinion explained there is no system of national bar admission; a lawyer must be admitted in Kentucky to practice in its courts, or obtain permission to practice pro hac vice in the particular court and case and engage local counsel to assist, the same practice as in federal court. It quoted SCR 3.030(2), under which a person admitted in another state but not in Kentucky may practice a case only if he subjects himself to the court's jurisdiction and conduct rules and engages a member of the Association as co-counsel, whose presence is necessary at all trials and when the court requires. Whether to grant or deny pro hac vice admission rests in the trial judge's discretion.

On the second, the opinion concluded that SCR 3.020 clearly prohibits lay representation of a corporation, with an exception limited to small claims court, and that the court may enforce that rule. The Committee added that it cannot answer questions of procedural or substantive law about how these issues are raised and decided, such as the application of statutes of limitation.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1991; the Kentucky Bar Association notes that the Kentucky Supreme Court later adopted comprehensive changes to the pro hac vice rules and substantially amended SCR 3.030. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against the current rules before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: How can an out-of-state lawyer appear in a Kentucky court?

A: The opinion concluded the lawyer must obtain pro hac vice admission in the particular case and engage a Kentucky-admitted lawyer as co-counsel, under SCR 3.030(2), with admission resting in the trial judge's discretion.

Q: Is Kentucky co-counsel required, or optional?

A: Required. The opinion quoted SCR 3.030(2), which conditions out-of-state practice on engaging a member of the Association as co-counsel whose presence is necessary at all trials and when the court requires.

Q: Can a non-lawyer represent a corporation in court?

A: No, except in small claims court. The opinion concluded SCR 3.020 prohibits lay representation of a corporation, with that single exception.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Kentucky's admission and unauthorized-practice court rules, SCR 3.030 (practice by lawyers admitted in other states, requiring pro hac vice admission and local co-counsel) and SCR 3.020 (prohibiting lay representation of corporations outside small claims court), rather than a numbered Rule of Professional Conduct.

Citations and references

Court rules:

• SCR 3.030(2) (out-of-state lawyers; pro hac vice and Kentucky co-counsel)
• SCR 3.020 (lay representation of a corporation prohibited outside small claims court)

Other authorities:

• Rule 3, U.S. District Courts for the Eastern and Western Districts of Kentucky (pro hac vice in federal court)

See also

• AL Ethics Op. 2014-01: Non-Lawyer Arbitration Rep
• AL Ethics Op. 1986-52: In-House Counsel & UPL
• GA Ethics Op. 05-10: Local Counsel and Discovery Abuse

Source

• Landing page: https://kybar.org/For-Members/Rules-Ethics-Information/Ethics-Opinions
• Original PDF: https://kybar.org/Portals/0/Admin/Ethics%20Opinions/KBA_E-345.pdf

Original opinion text

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

KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION
Ethics Opinion KBA E-345
Issued: March 1991

The Kentucky Supreme Court adopted comprehensive changes to the pro hac vice rules.
This opinion refers to SCR 3.030, which was substantially amended. Lawyers should
consult the current version of the rule, (available at http://www.kybar.org), before
relying on this opinion.

Question 1:

How may a practitioner licensed in another state practice in the courts of Kentucky?

Answer 1:

See Opinion.

Question 2:

May a non-lawyer represent a corporation in a court other than the small claims
court?

Answer 2:

No.
OPINION

One would have assumed that questions like this should not have to be addressed in formal
opinions, but there have been a rash of incidents of late raising these issues.
There is no system of national bar admission. It has been the rule in the past that a lawyer
must be admitted in Kentucky to practice in Kentucky courts, or must obtain permission to
practice pro hac vice in the particular court in the particular case, and obtain local counsel to
assist. This has also been the practice in federal court. See Rule 3 of the United States District
Courts for the Eastern and Western Districts of Kentucky (we note that there is a note to the 1991
edition of the Rules that some amendment to this rule is being considered, but not details are
provided). SCR 3.030(2) provides: "A person admitted to practice in another state, but not in this
state, shall be permitted to practice a case in this state only if he subjects himself to the
jurisdiction and Rules of the Court governing professional conduct and engages a member of the
Association as co-counsel, whose presence shall be necessary at all trials and at other times when
required by the Court." Clearly, the trial judge has authority to enforce these rules and
conventions. The question of whether to grant or deny a motion for admission pro hac vice rests
in the discretion of the trial judge.
The Court may also enforce Rule 3.020, which clearly prohibits lay representation of a
corporation (with an exception limited to small claims court).

The committee does not and cannot answer questions of procedural or substantive law
relating to the manner in which these issues might be raised and decided, the application of statutes
of limitation, and the like.

Note to Reader
This ethics opinion has been formally adopted by the Board of Governors of the Kentucky
Bar Association under the provisions of Kentucky Supreme Court Rule 3.530 (or its predecessor
rule). The Rule provides that formal opinions are advisory only.