USA – NEVADA Trends and Developments Contributed by: Leon F Mead, Mead Law Group
Need for Local Counsel Nevada is a large geographic state with a rela- tively small population. It has one large popula- tion centre in the south (Las Vegas), one medium- sized one in the north (Reno), and many smaller rural communities throughout the remainder of the state. It is also relatively close to the major metropolitan areas of surrounding states ‒ a few hours’ drive in most cases. These factors often lead to an unstated expectation by legal practitioners (and occasionally litigants) that the laws of Nevada are the same as or sufficiently similar to those of neighbouring states, such that non-resident counsel licensed in Nevada do not prioritise obtaining local counsel. In almost all cases, that thinking is a strategic mistake. It is also crucial to understand that the Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct and Nevada case law strongly mandate not only the retention of local counsel but also the active participation in and control of litigation by that local counsel. Nearly 30 years ago, the Nevada Standing Com- mittee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility succinctly outlined the concerns of the State Bar regarding out-of-state counsel in Formal Opinion No 20 (24 February 1995), as follows. “[T]he Nevada Supreme Court has exclusive jurisdiction to discipline attorneys admitted to practice law in Nevada, specially admitted for a particular proceeding, or “practicing law here, whether specially admitted or not”. Nevada, like many jurisdictions, does not define “the prac- tice of law” and each incident is considered on a case-by-case basis. Generally speaking, when another relies upon your judgment or opinion as to [their] legal rights, you are practicing law. “The Bar has received complaints of out-of-state counsel participating in the pre-litigation medi- ation procedures. Writing notification letters,
engaging in discovery, and appearing at pre-lit- igation mediations in a representative capacity is generally the practice of law. In Nevada, there is no mechanism to obtain authority from the Supreme Court to appear in pre-litigation cases. Therefore, engaging in legal activities involving Nevada disputes and Nevada parties normally requires a licensed Nevada attorney. “In addition, the Bar has received inquiries [into] and complaints of out-of-counsel participating in private arbitration hearings in Nevada. Acting as a mediator or arbitrator is permissible. Parties to private arbitration can choose anyone as the [t]rier of fact. However, representing a Nevada client here or representing a client in a Nevada based dispute is practi[s]ing law, and requires a Nevada-licensed attorney. “Finally, merely holding yourself out as an attor- ney can constitute the practice of law. This issue most often arises in correspondence from an attorney licensed in another state but not in Nevada. A licensed attorney who is not admitted to practice in Nevada must clearly designate that fact on letterhead. Further, an attorney licensed only in a foreign jurisdiction must indicate any jurisdictional limitations following [their] signa- ture on firm stationery. “Ultimately, the test is whether or not under the circumstances the public would believe that the person is a licensed attorney. This can dif- fer from state to state. For example, in Nevada, attorneys almost always use “esquire” following their name and the community and the local bar deem it interchangeable with “attorney”. As a general proposition, persons not admitted in any jurisdiction (ie, law clerks or law school gradu- ates) may not use “esquire” because it can be misleading to the public.”
1495 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook