State ex rel. Comm. on Unauth. Prac. of Law v. Tyler

was appealing from action taken by the county assessor.12 We
agreed with TERC’s reasoning that the taxpayer’s appeal from
the Board to TERC was not from a protest made under chapter
77, article 15, of the Nebraska Revised Statutes.
Our reasoning and holding in Republic Bank control the
identical jurisdictional issue presented in this appeal.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons more fully set forth in Republic Bank, we
conclude that TERC did not err in dismissing Prime Alliance’s
appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, due to the fact
that the appeal was not timely filed under § 77-1233.06(4).
Accordingly, we affirm.
A ffirmed.
12 Id. at 730, 811 N.W.2d at 689.
StAte of NebrASkA ex rel . C ommiSSioN oN
UNAUthorized P rACtiCe of lAw, relAtor ,
v. billy roy tyler , reSPoNdeNt.
811 N.W.2d 678
Filed April 20, 2012. 	No. S-11-713.
1. Rules of the Supreme Court: Attorneys at Law. The Nebraska Supreme Court
has the inherent power to define and regulate the practice of law and is vested
with exclusive power to determine the qualifications of persons who may be per-
mitted to practice law.
2. ____: ____. The inherent power of the Nebraska Supreme Court to define and
regulate the practice of law includes the power to prevent persons who are not
attorneys admitted to practice in this state from engaging in the practice of law.
3. Attorney and Client: Actions. A legal proceeding in which a party is repre-
sented by a person not admitted to practice law is considered a nullity and is
subject to dismissal.
4. Rules of the Supreme Court: Attorneys at Law. Pursuant to its inherent author-
ity to define and regulate the practice of law in Nebraska, the Nebraska Supreme
Court has adopted rules specifically addressed to the unauthorized practice
of law.
Original action. Injunction issued.
Sean J. Brennan, Special Prosecutor, for relator.
736 	283 NEBRASkA REPORTS
Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library
www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/
11/01/2026 04:43 AM CST

Billy Roy Tyler, pro se.
heAviCAN, C.J., wright, C oNNolly, StePhAN, mCC ormACk ,
and miller-lermAN, JJ.
P er CUriAm.
This is an original action to enjoin the unauthorized practice
of law. We conclude that an injunction should issue.
BACkGROUND
On June 2, 2011, pursuant to Neb. Ct. R. § 3-1014(E)
(rev. 2008), the Nebraska Supreme Court Commission on
Unauthorized Practice of Law (Commission) notified Billy
Roy Tyler (Respondent) by certified mail that it had received
complaints that he was engaged in activities in Douglas
County, Nebraska, which, if true, would constitute the unau-
thorized practice of law. Specifically, the Commission alleged
that Respondent engaged in unauthorized practice by (1)
preparing pleadings for other individuals and either filing
the documents or preparing them for others to file pro se
and (2) representing other individuals in the district court for
Douglas County.
The letter informed Respondent that he had 20 days to
respond to the allegations and directed him to cease and desist
from his actions. The letter also notified Respondent that the
Commission was beginning a formal investigation of the allega-
tions. A copy of the Supreme Court Rules on the Unauthorized
Practice of Law, Neb. Ct. R. §§ 3-1001 to 3-1021 (rev. 2008),
was enclosed with the letter.
The certified mailing was returned to the Commission
unclaimed, but the same letter sent by regular U.S. mail was
not returned. Respondent left a voice message with counsel
for the Commission which confirmed he had received the let-
ter. In the message, Respondent stated that the letter contained
“lies and inaccuracies,” that it was “slanderous and libelous,”
and that he intended to sue counsel for the Commission due to
its contents.
On June 17, 2011, counsel for the Commission acknowledged
by letter Respondent’s voice message, noted Respondent’s
denial of the allegations, and informed Respondent that the
STATE Ex REL. COmm. ON UNAUTh. PRAC. OF LAW v. TyLER 	737
Cite as 283 Neb. 736

Commission was prepared to proceed with civil injunction
proceedings. Respondent was again offered an opportunity to
submit information regarding his alleged unauthorized practice
to counsel for the Commission. The June 17 certified mailing
was returned to the Commission unclaimed, but the same letter
sent by regular U.S. mail was not returned.
On August 8, 2011, the Commission filed a “Petition for
Injunctive Relief” in this court pursuant to § 3-1015. The peti-
tion stated the Commission had made findings that Respondent
had engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. Specifically,
the 	Commission 	alleged 	that 	from 	October 	15, 	2009, 	to
the present,
(A) The Respondent has been and is giving advice or
counsel, direct or indirect, to other persons as to the legal
rights of those persons, where a relationship of trust or
reliance exists between the Respondent and the persons to
which such advice or counsel is given;
(B) The Respondent has engaged in selecting, drafting,
completing, and/or filing, for other persons, legal docu-
ments which affect the legal rights of those persons;
(C) The Respondent has appeared in court on behalf of
parties to legal matters;
(D) The Respondent is not licensed to practice law in
the state of Nebraska and thus, is unauthorized to engage
in the conduct referred to herein.
An alias summons was personally served on Respondent
by the Douglas County sheriff’s office on October 19, 2011,
after both a prior attempt at personal service and an attempt
at service by certified mail failed. Pursuant to § 3-1015(C),
Respondent’s answer to the petition was due 30 days after
service, which was November 18, 2011. On October 25,
Respondent filed a document entitled “motion to appoint
Counsel & for inspection & discovery.” Respondent did not
file an answer to the petition.
Based 	on 	Respondent’s 	failure 	to 	file 	an 	answer, 	the
Commission filed a “motion for Summary Judgment and Civil
Injunction” on December 2, 2011. The motion alleged that
Respondent was in default by his failure to answer the peti-
tion. The Commission sought an order of this court enjoining
738 	283 NEBRASkA REPORTS

Respondent from engaging in the unauthorized practice of law.
No response to this motion was filed by Respondent.
On February 29, 2012, this court entered an order requiring
Respondent to show cause within 20 days as to why the court
should not dispose of the matter pursuant to § 3-1015(D) and
grant the petition for injunctive relief based on Respondent’s
failure to file a written answer. On the same date, the court
denied Respondent’s “motion to appoint Counsel & for inspec-
tion & discovery.”
In response to this court’s order of February 29, 2012,
Respondent filed a document captioned “Traverse to 2-29-12
order” in which he stated, “No Evidence Counsel hearing No
due Process am suing!” To that pleading, Respondent attached
what appears to be a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) petition to be
filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska and
an in forma pauperis request in that court.
DISPOSITION
[1-3] This court has the inherent power to define and regu-
late the practice of law and is vested with exclusive power to
determine the qualifications of persons who may be permitted
to practice law.1 This includes the power to prevent persons
who are not attorneys admitted to practice in this state from
engaging in the practice of law.2 A legal proceeding in which
a party is represented by a person not admitted to practice law
is considered a nullity and is subject to dismissal.3 This is not
for the benefit of lawyers admitted to practice in this state, but
“‘“for the protection of citizens and litigants in the administra-
tion of justice, against the mistakes of the ignorant on the one
1 State ex rel. Comm. on Unauth. Prac. of Law v. Yah, 281 Neb. 383, 796
N.W.2d 189 (2011); State ex rel. Hunter v. Kirk, 133 Neb. 625, 276 N.W.
380 (1937); In re Integration of Nebraska State Bar Ass’n, 133 Neb. 283,
275 N.W. 265 (1937); State ex rel. Wright v. Barlow, 131 Neb. 294, 268
N.W. 95 (1936).
2 Yah, supra note 1.
3 Id. See, also, Anderzhon/Architects v. 57 Oxbow II Partnership, 250 Neb.
768, 553 N.W.2d 157 (1996); Back Acres Pure Trust v. Fahnlander, 233
Neb. 28, 443 N.W.2d 604 (1989); Niklaus v. Abel Construction Co., 164
Neb. 842, 83 N.W.2d 904 (1957).
STATE Ex REL. COmm. ON UNAUTh. PRAC. OF LAW v. TyLER 	739
Cite as 283 Neb. 736

hand, and the machinations of unscrupulous persons on the
other . . . .”’”4
[4] Pursuant to our inherent authority to define and regulate
the practice of law in Nebraska, this court has adopted rules
specifically addressed to the unauthorized practice of law.5 At
the core of these rules is a general prohibition: “No nonlawyer
shall engage in the practice of law in Nebraska or in any man-
ner represent that such nonlawyer is authorized or qualified to
practice law in Nebraska except as may be authorized by pub-
lished opinion or court rule.”6 “Nonlawyer” is defined by the
rules as “any person not duly licensed or otherwise authorized
to practice law in the State of Nebraska,” including “any entity
or organization not authorized to practice law by specific rule
of the Supreme Court whether or not it employs persons who
are licensed to practice law.”7 The term “practice of law” is
defined as
the application of legal principles and judgment with
regard to the circumstances or objectives of another entity
or person which require the knowledge, judgment, and
skill of a person trained as a lawyer. This includes, but is
not limited to, the following:
(A) Giving advice or counsel to another entity or per-
son as to the legal rights of that entity or person or the
legal rights of others for compensation, direct or indirect,
where a relationship of trust or reliance exists between
the party giving such advice or counsel and the party to
whom it is given.
(B) Selection, drafting, or completion, for another entity
or person, of legal documents which affect the legal rights
of the entity or person.
(C) Representation of another entity or person in a
court . . . .8
4 Yah, supra note 1, 281 Neb. at 391, 796 N.W.2d at 196, quoting Niklaus,
supra note 3.
5 See §§ 3-1001 to 3-1021.
6 § 3-1003.
7 § 3-1002(A).
8 § 3-1001.
740 	283 NEBRASkA REPORTS

Our unauthorized practice rules include civil enforcement
procedures under which the Commission may institute civil
injunction proceedings in this court,9 as it has done in this case.
The rules provide that within 30 days after service of a petition
alleging unauthorized practice of law, the “respondent shall file
. . . a written answer admitting or denying the matter stated
in the petition.”10 The rules further provide that if no written
answer is filed, as is the case here, this court “upon its motion
or upon the motion of the Commission or its counsel, shall
decide the case, granting such relief and issuing such other
orders as may be appropriate.”11 That is the posture in which
this case comes before us now.
Accordingly, we find the following facts as alleged in the
petition and not denied by Respondent to be true:
(A) The Respondent has been and is giving advice or
counsel, direct or indirect, to other persons as to the legal
rights of those persons, where a relationship of trust or
reliance exists between the Respondent and the persons to
[whom] such advice or counsel is given;
(B) The Respondent has engaged in selecting, drafting,
completing, and/or filing, for other persons, legal docu-
ments which affect the legal rights of those persons;
(C) The Respondent has appeared in court on behalf of
parties to legal matters;
(D) The Respondent is not licensed to practice law in
the state of Nebraska[.]
Based upon these facts, we conclude that Respondent is a
nonlawyer who has repeatedly engaged in the practice of
law as defined by § 3-1001(A), (B), and (C) and that there
is a very real risk of harm to the public if his conduct is
not enjoined.
Accordingly, by separate order entered on April 19, 2012,
Respondent is enjoined from engaging in the unauthorized
practice of law in any manner, including but not limited to the
9 §§ 3-1015 to 3-1018.
10 § 3-1015(C).
11 § 3-1015(D).
STATE Ex REL. COmm. ON UNAUTh. PRAC. OF LAW v. TyLER 	741
Cite as 283 Neb. 736

following: (1) giving advice or counsel to another entity or
person as to the legal rights of that entity or person or the legal
rights of others for compensation, direct or indirect, where a
relationship of trust or reliance exists between Respondent and
the party to whom it is given; (2) selecting, drafting, or com-
pleting, for another entity or person, legal documents which
affect the legal rights of the entity or person; and (3) represent-
ing another entity or person in a court, in a formal administra-
tive adjudicative proceeding or other formal dispute resolution
process, or in an administrative adjudicative proceeding in
which legal pleadings are filed or a record is established as
the basis for judicial review. Noncompliance with this order
of injunction shall constitute contempt punishable under this
court’s inherent power and § 3-1019.
iNJUNCtioN iSSUed.
742 	283 NEBRASkA REPORTS