Drake

Drake v. Superior Court

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 63·21 Cal. App. 4th 1826·26 Cal. Rptr. 2d 829·94 Daily Journal DAR 1077·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 646
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 27, 1994D019658California1,591 words

Opinion

Opinion

Work, J.

In this case we must decide whether the longstanding, statutory prohibition against the practice of law by persons not admitted to the bar has been abrogated by the more recently adopted Uniform Statutory Form Power of Attorney Act (Power of Attorney Act). (Civ. Code, §§ 2475-2499.5, added Stats. 1990, ch. 986 (Sen. Bill No. 1777).) We specifically address the broad powers relating to the authority of an attorney in fact in matters of claims and litigation set forth in section 2494. That statute reads:

For the following reasons we conclude, despite the broad language, the Power of Attorney Act does not permit attorneys in fact to engage in legal activities clothed only with a power of attorney.

Factual and Procedural Background

Tina Posey signed a printed form giving Terry Drake a power of attorney permitting him to act for her in matters relating to judicial claims and litigation as stated in section 2494. Representing himself on the pleading as the attorney in fact for Tina, Drake attempted to obtain a family court stay-away order, order to show cause and temporary restraining order prohibiting Paul Posey from contacting Tina or coming within 100 yards of Tina’s…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.