COLUMBUS, Ohio - (Business Wire) Two motions for reconsideration were filed Monday October 26, 2009 with the Ohio Supreme Court by Heritage Marketing and Insurance Services, Inc., American Family Prepaid Legal Corporation, and Jeffrey L. Norman. The motions ask the court to reconsider its decision in case number 2005-0422, ordering both companies to pay fees of nearly $6.4 million. The court's order resulted from an unauthorized practice of law case brought by the Columbus Bar Association against both estate planning companies. The order concluded the companies sold legal plans to senior citizens in violation of laws barring non-attorneys from practicing law. The court reached its decision in its order based on the recommendation from the Ohio Board on the Unauthorized Practice of Law's Final Report in case number UPL 02-10.
One motion for reconsideration claims an August 17, 2007 pretrial conference call was lawfully recorded by a Columbus, Ohio defendant who was a party to the call. A transcript of a tape recording of the Board's three "volunteer" Panel Members, James L. Ervin, Don J. Hunt, and C. Lynne Day was attached as a motion exhibit.
The motion indicates, "Don Hunt stated he had 'white knuckles from not speaking out' and that C. Lynne Day admitted to 'looking stuff up about them (defendants) online'."
The motion further states, "Finally, and most egregious, is a statement of Panel Chair, James L. Ervin, esq. who declared, 'I made a promise that when I leave this board, this case will be over', to which C. Lynne Day and Don Hunt then concurred. James Ervin, who made this promise, was serving a term set to expire at the end of 2007," a few months from the date of the pretrial conference.
The motion continues with, "It is clear that the only mechanism at the disposal of this board to conclude the matter as it was pending in front of the Board, by the conclusion of Chairman Ervin's term, was to grant Summary Judgment, which the board did two months later on December 21st, 2007. This was at the tail end of the Chair's term and as promised to the other board members by the Chair. In light of these facts, it is clear that Summary Judgment was granted against the Defendants by a biased judicial body that clearly had a fixed anticipatory judgment thereby denying Due Process."
The motions ask the court to "either rescind the order or, remand the case back to the Board for a hearing before an unbiased panel of judges in order to properly put the facts and evidence of this case on record."
Heritage Marketing and Insurance Services, Inc.
Jeff Norman, 949-757-2251
