As Ribstein points out, U.S. ethics rules prohibit
nonlawyer owners of firms.
Not exact matches
I understand that in countries like the US and Canada there is opposition to ILP - type structures in part because
of a belief that as
owners of a law
firm,
nonlawyers would cause the
firm to act unethically.
To distinguish
firms that have
nonlawyer owners or managers, or that engage in multidisciplinary practices, from traditional law
firms and sole practitioners, the U.K. rules provide for a new kind
of legal company, referred to as an alternative business structure.
Finally, if
nonlawyer owners could invest in law
firms, Heller might have had access to a permanent source
of capital to stay afloat and would not have had to rely on bank loans alone.
I am not aware
of any complaints made, and there are no reported disciplinary actions that were connected to the activities
of a
nonlawyer owner or to the fact that a
firm had a
nonlawyer owner.