On February 7, 2008, Leroy Skipper granted a power of attorney to the Plaintiff. In March 2008, Plaintiff, who is not an attorney, filed a Complaint on behalf of Mr. Skipper in the District Court of Maryland for Prince George's County alleging that Mr. Skipper's vehicle was struck by a vehicle insured by GEICO on August 18, 2007. On July 2, a GEICO staff attorney filed an Answer to the underlying Complaint. Defense counsel further alerted the Attorney Grievance Commission that Plaintiff had filed an action in the District Court on behalf of another individual. On July 10, 2008, Melvin Hirshman, Esquire, Bar Counsel to the Attorney Grievance Commission, advised Plaintiff that Plaintiff's activity constituted the unauthorized practice of law and warned that there could be criminal penalties for such activity. On August 1, 2008, Plaintiff and Mr. Skipper met with defense counsel and settled Mr. Skipper's claim. The underlying action was dismissed on or about August 5, 2008.

Plaintiff subsequently filed a separate civil action against Defendants in which he alleged violations to his constitutional rights to exercise and enjoy the powers of being an attorney. A trial court dismissed the action in a written opinion stating that "a power of attorney does not authorize a lay person to practice law." See Ross v. Chandrima Chakrabarti, No. 6, at *4.

The Plaintiff appealed the Circuit Court's dismissal of the Complaint. He argued that the power of attorney gave him the ability to act as Mr. Skipper's agent for all purposes, including litigation. Furthermore, Plaintiff argued that GEICO's settlement with Mr. Skipper violated Plaintiff's right to perform litigation services under a power of attorney.

The intermediate appellate court explained that the power of attorney gives the Plaintiff the right to act on Mr. Skipper's behalf "only to the extent that [Skipper was] permitted by law to act through an agent." Id. at *6 (internal citations omitted). Pursuant to Md. Code Ann., Bus. Occ. & Prof. § 10-601(a), only a person admitted to the Bar may practice law in Maryland. Practicing law is defined as giving legal advice or representing another person in court. Accordingly, only a person admitted to the Maryland Bar may perform those services. A power of attorney does not convey the ability or the right to perform legal services such as drafting and filing of Complaints, or appearing in Court on behalf of another individual.

Plaintiff argued that longstanding case law prohibiting practice of law by a non-attorney violates the public interest and is unconstitutional. The intermediate appellate court rejected this argument and stated that the prohibition of non-barred persons from practicing law is intended to protect the public from being preyed upon by those who are not competent to practice law.

Accordingly, the Court of Special Appeals affirmed the trial court's dismissal of Plaintiff's Complaint.