[hardtoremember]

Do this yourself... tell me what happens.

Every State in the union has laws on their books forbidding the unauthorized practice of Law. This fact alone might lead one to conclude that being a licensed member of the legal professional is not only required, but that one not so duly appointed had better not even think about offering legal advice without having a “license to practice law”. To test this assumption, we go to California, the union’s most populace state, to see how they do it California style.

To begin this journey of discovery you can go online to the Secretary of State for California web site. All bona fide corporations public and private must be registered with the secretary of state. Do a search for “California Bar Association” and notice several strange anomalies with the posted information. For one, while the incorporation date of record is listed as 1907, this date differs from the date on the seal of the letter head for the California Bar that lists an incorporation date of 1927. Now notice that the status of the California Bar is inactive. Also notice that there is no agent listed for service of process, nor is there a listing for the corporate address. Go to the Secretary of State web sites for the states neighboring California and you will discover the same anomalies—listed but inactive, without contact information.

Now call the California Corporate Commission to discover if they can explain the anomalies and they will advise you that the State Bar of California was formed by statute (legislative act), and therefore not formed in accordance with the California Corporation Code.

Next, call the executive director at the headquarters for the California Bar Association in San Francisco and ask the following three questions:

1. Why is the California Bar Association an inactive corporation?

2. What type of organization (legal classification) is the California State Bar Association?

3. Why does the incorporation date on the letter head seal differ from the date of incorporation listed with the California Corporation Commission?

While the executive director will not be able to clear up the mystery to any of the questions listed above, you will be assured that the State Bar of California is a constitutional agency in the judicial branch of State government, and that it serves an administrative function for the California Supreme Court in matters relating to the regulation of the legal profession.

However, the California State Constitution and the California Business & Professions code, does not agree with this claim—these two authorities describe the State Bar of California as a public corporation, not a ‘constitutional agency”.

To complicate matters still, the California Secretary of State refuses to issue a “Certificate of Non filing”, a five dollar ($5.00) fee, a standard form for any unregistered, non-filing public corporation. By claiming that the State Bar Corporation was created by legislative act, the Secretary of State can take the position that it lacks authority to issue the certificate, even though the State Bar Association actively touts itself to be a public corporation. In so doing the California Bar has effectively exempted itself from registration and shielded its books from public scrutiny. The following obscure cite from 7 Corpus Juris Secundum 9 reveals the deceit being perpetrated here:

“In view of the decision that the creation of public corporation by special acts is prohibited by state constitution, state bar act creating state bar corporation as public corporation has no viability and designation of state bar as ‘public corporation’ has no legal efficacy.” Bridgegroom v. State Bar, 550, P.2d 1089, 27 ArizApp. 47.

To further interpret what this means: the State Bar of California enjoys the best of both worlds; an apparent agency of government, enjoying the power and protection of the state, including exemption from taxation, while in fact a pirate institution without legal basis.

Whereas the notion of a “license to practice law” is scarcely mentioned in state and federal codes, the requirements relating to every other kind of license in existence is spelled out in mind-numbing detail (e.g. Vehicle Code, Internal Revenue Code, etc.). The sacred “license to practice law”, however, is undefined—answers to questions regarding where it comes from, how it is conferred, where one goes to see what it looks like, its tenure, its cost, remain elusive like the wind. These and other intensely pertinent questions remain unanswered by the codes that imply its existence.