“Foreign” Attorneys
Two years ago, the Mississippi Supreme Court adopted one of the most strict pro hac vice rules in the nation. Pro hace vice (pronounced proh hock vee-chay) is Latin meaning “this time only”; the term applies to an out-of-state lawyer appearing in a court of a jurisdiction where a trial is being held, even though the lawyer is not licensed to practice law in that state. Generally speaking, an application for for pro hac vice, if meeting the requirements set forth by the rule, is usually granted; often jurisdictions require association of a local attorney who is admitted to the bar in the jurisdiction.
In Mitchell v. Progressive Insurance Company, 965 So. 2d 679 (MS 2007), the Mississippi Supreme Court demonstrated that it meant business when it established such a strict rule. In Mitchell, a claim against an insured’s insurance company was barred by the statute of limitations because the pleading initiating the litigation was not validly filed in a Mississippi court prior to the expiration of the statute of limitations. It was not validly filed, the Court said, because the Louisiana attorney who filed the claim, had not been properly admitted under Mississippi Rule of Appellate Procedure 46 (b).
Not only did the Mitchell’s lose their cause of action, but the Mississippi Supreme Court found that the Louisiana attorney had engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in the State of Mississippi and remanded the case to the Circuit Court in which it had been filed and dismissed, instructing the Circuit Court to notify the Louisiana State Bar and impose sanctions.
The moral to the story for state and local governments: if suit is filed by out-of-state counsel, look carefully at the requirements of Rule 46 (b) to ensure that they are complied with before going further with the litigation.
 |
|