ISBA Summary Judgment Further Defines “Practice of Law”

summary judgement practice of lawThis June, the Illinois State Bar Association (ISBA) won summary judgment in a lawsuit against the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (IDFPR) regarding whether an attorney representing a client in a property tax proceeding violates the Appraisal Act, thus functioning as an unlicensed appraiser when that attorney provides an analysis of comparable property valuations to the client. If the attorney was acting in such a capacity, the IDFPR could prosecute the attorney for offering appraisal services without a proper state license when they argue valuations before tax assessment appeal tribunals. Otherwise, the acts of the lawyer constituted the practice of law, which is regulated exclusively by the Illinois Supreme Court.

The IDFPR asserted that two attorneys, G. Terence Nader and David Bass, members of the ISBA, violated state law for allegedly including an “opinion of value” of properties in briefs filed with property tax appeal boards on behalf of their clients.

However, the ISBA argued that the IDFPR didn’t have the authority to impose these charges as these attorneys, and any attorney acting in a similar manner, are not acting as an “Appraiser” under Illinois law. As a result, they filed suit against the regulatory department for declaratory judgment, injunctive relief, and a writ of prohibition against IDFPR.

The Circuit Court of Cook County (where the suit was filed) found that :

the comparison of properties or an income approach valuation presented by a licensed Illinois attorney on behalf of a client in real estate tax assessment proceedings does not entail the development or submission of an appraisal or constitute unlicensed practice of real estate appraisal.

The trial court relied on a prior Supreme Court decision that concluded the activity of representing a client in a property tax proceeding constitutes the practice of law and thus is regulated exclusively by the Illinois Supreme Court.

In the court’s finding for the Plaintiff ISBA, the also enjoined the IDFPR for future enforcement actions against licensed Illinois attorneys for such practices and issued a writ of prohibition against the IDFPR “preventing [it] from initiating, maintaining, or threatening a prosecution of [a licensed Illinois attorney] for engaging in the submission of a comparison of properties or income approach valuation by a property tax attorney in a real estate tax assessment proceeding.”

Like the legal profession, real estate appraisers are regulated by an administrative agency, like the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission. The major difference is that the IDFPR is composed of four different divisions that regulate a wide array of industries, including physicians, detectives, cosmetologists, CPAs, architects, and more. The IDFPR’s Division of Real Estate who regulates real estate appraisers also regulates brokers, auctioneers, community association managers and home inspectors.

Share this:

Erika Kubik

Erika Kubik

Former Communications Specialist at Illinois Supreme Court Commission on Professionalism
Erika is the former Communications Specialist for the Illinois Supreme Court Commission on Professionalism. She successfully developed strategies to increase 2Civility’s social presence across channels. As a recent graduate of Bradley University, Erika received her Bachelor of Arts studying Public Relations and Social Media Marketing where her passion for writing and brand development took flight. Outside of the office, Erika works to develop her own personal brand as she takes on Chicago for the first time having grown up just outside of the Greater St. Louis area. Though she may not be accustomed to the deep dish pizza as a Celiac, she has found the Windy City to be quite accommodating to her active lifestyle as a runner and fitness fanatic.
Erika Kubik

5 thoughts on “ISBA Summary Judgment Further Defines “Practice of Law”

  1. As a former Director of the !DPR ( 1974-1977) I would opine that the IDPR was over-reaching in its action against the lawyers in this case. I commend the judge who found in favor of the ISBA. Within the IDPR turf battles rage all of the time: Medical doctors v. chiropractors; medical doctors v. cosmetologists re ear piercing; medical doctors v. podiatrists; architects v. structural engineers re designing habitation as distinct from bridges; ad infinitum ad nasuseam.

  2. My bet is this was an indirect way for Gov. Rauner to challenge Speaker Madigan’s full time job as an attorney engaged in property tax appeals.

  3. Many times I have presented compilations or conflates. These types of information can be indispensable in the pursuit of justice.
    An attorney needs to be able to argue all matters that would enhance her, or his, representation of a client without fear of iinterloping into another licensing authority.
    I think it should be grounded upon how one represents himself or herself.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *