Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

SJC to Hear Important “Unauthorized Practice of Law” Case

By Donald Pinto on November 1, 2010
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On Tuesday, November 2, 2010, the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) will hear oral argument in The Real Estate Bar Association of Massachusetts, Inc. (REBA) v. National Real Estate Information Services, Inc. (NREIS), an important case that’s being closely watched around the country.

NREIS describes itself as a “multi-state real estate settlement services provider.”  NREIS “facilitates” real estate closings by hiring subcontractors — mostly non-attorneys — to perform the various tasks required to transfer title to real estate.  REBA sued NREIS in state court, alleging that NREIS is engaged in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL) in violation of M.G.L. c. 221, §§ 46 et seq., Massachusetts’ UPL statute.  NREIS removed the case to federal court and filed a counterclaim alleging that, by challenging its business practices, REBA had violated NREIS’s federal constitutional rights.  The federal District Court granted summary judgment to NREIS, not only finding that REBA had volated NREIS’s rights under the so-called dormant Commerce Clause, but awarding NREIS nearly $1 million in attorneys’ fees.  REBA appealed and the First Circuit Court of Appeals reversed (pdf), ruling (pretty emphatically, I’d say) that there has been no constitutional violation, and vacating the award of attorneys’ fees.  With regard to the state-law issue of whether NREIS is engaged in UPL, the First Circuit certified two questions to the SJC. 

In addition to the parties’ briefs, the SJC has received nearly 20 amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) briefs, virtually all of which support REBA’s position that NREIS is engaged in UPL.  The SJC’s on-line docket, which includes copies of many of these briefs in pdf format, can be found here.   A live webcast or the oral argument, which should start around 9:30 a.m., can be viewed from this page of the Suffolk Law School website.  If you’re interested but don’t have time to watch the argument live, it will be accessible later from the same page by clicking the “View Archive” button.

  • Posted in:
    Business of Law
  • Blog:
    Massachusetts Land Use Monitor
  • Organization:
    Rackemann, Sawyer & Brewster
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo