Charter One Mortgage Corporation v. Kyle Condra

Summary

The Indiana Supreme Court held that non-attorneys’ completion of standard mortgage documents does not necessarily constitute the unauthorized practice of law. It further held that charging a fee for that document preparation does not transform otherwise permissible conduct into unauthorized practice. The court reversed and remanded with instructions to grant Charter One’s motion to dismiss the borrower’s claims.

Holdings

1. Filling in the blanks of standard mortgage documents by non-attorneys is not the unauthorized practice of law when the activity involves routine information and does not include legal advice, legal opinions, or the exercise of legal discretion.
2. The mere charging of a fee does not transform otherwise permissible preparation of standard mortgage documents by non-attorneys into the unauthorized practice of law.
3. Condra failed to state a claim because the alleged fee for routine mortgage-document preparation did not constitute unauthorized practice of law.
4. The court did not need to decide whether OCC regulations preempted Indiana law because the complaint failed under Indiana law as construed by the court.

Questions Presented

1. Whether charging a fee for the preparation of standard mortgage documents by non-attorneys converts otherwise permissible document preparation into the unauthorized practice of law.
2. Whether Condra's complaint stated a claim for relief based on the alleged unauthorized practice of law.
3. Whether the court needed to decide whether federal regulations under the National Bank Act preempt Indiana law governing unauthorized practice of law.

Disposition

remanded