Judge dismisses suit over non-lawyers signing motions

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit challenging the authority of non-lawyer staff members of the Division of Child Support Enforcement to sign motions to hold in contempt parents who are delinquent in their support obligations.

U.S. District Judge Glen E. Conrad ruled that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine deprives him of jurisdiction to decide the issue because the Virginia State Bar's Standing Committee on Unauthorized Practice of Law had rejected David B. Briggman's contention that the practice is the unauthorized practice of law.

The committee was acting in its judicial capacity, and, under the doctrine, a federal court has no jurisdiction to review and reject a state court judgment.

Conrad noted in Briggman v. Commonwealth (VLW 008-3-003) that Briggman still has the opportunity to challenge show cause motions and other pleadings filed by DCSE employees who are not attorneys. Briggman said he intends to refile his challenge to the practice in Rockingham Circuit Court.

Briggman contended in the
federal suit that DCSE lacks the authority to enforce thousands of such
orders because their filing by non-attorneys rendered them void ab
initio.

Kimberly J. Daniel, a juvenile and domestic relations district judge in Fairfax County, dismissed such a motion in October because it was not signed by an attorney.

Craig M. Burshem, a senior assistant attorney general who represents DCSE, said he disagrees with Daniel but does not want to run the risk that a DCSE employee could be charged criminally with the misdemeanor of practicing law without a license. One of the 45 attorneys who routinely represents the division will sign such motions, he said.

Burshem said the attorney general's office is considering its options, including submission of legislation to the General Assembly or a request for an amended rule of court, to address Briggman's argument and Daniel's ruling.

Powered by ScribeFire.