<<  <  >  >>

Page 2

Introduction

Rosemary Furman had for years openly and flagrantly

violated the laws of Florida.  Her final appeal was turned

down by the Florida Supreme Court, which ordered that she be

jailed.1  Her crime was to have helped, by preparing and

filing the necessary legal papers, people who wanted a di-

vorce.  Her customers sought her services and willingly paid

for them.  None had ever complained about her work.

Before engaging in that "criminal activity," Furman had

been a legal secretary doing exactly the same paperwork, but

under the "supervision" of an attorney.  He charged clients

$300 to handle a divorce, then paid her a small fraction of

that amount for her work.  Furman thought that high price

for filing for divorce was unconscionable, particularly in

cases where battered women were unable to obtain a divorce

because they could not afford the attorney's fees.  So she

decided to go into business for herself, charging only $50

for divorce filings.  At first, she worked only with bat-

tered women.  Later, however, she expanded her business to

assist anyone who wanted her services.  She did a large

volume of business.

Despite her success--doubtless, because of it--Furman

was headed for trouble: she was acting in violation of the

law.  Under Florida law, only licensed attorneys may engage

in "the practice of law."  She was not a licensed attorney,

and the preparation of divorce papers was regarded by the

Florida Bar as work only attorneys could do.  After the bar

brought action against her, she was ordered to cease and

desist from her illegal conduct.  She refused.  For her

unwillingness to stop doing work she wanted to do and her

clients wanted her to do for them, she was ordered by the

Florida Supreme Court to serve 120 days in jail, 90 of which

would be suspended if she promised not to violate the law

again.  Subsequent intervention by the governor kept her

from doing actual jail time.  The point was made, though;

she never again competed in the market for legal services.

The case of Furman, hardly unique, raises several

important questions.  Should it be illegal for individuals

to enter a field of work and contract with willing clients

without first obtaining governmental permission to do so?

Does the U.S. Constitution give the states unchecked power

to restrict the freedom to choose one's occupation, by

imposing onerous and arbitrary licensing requirements?  Does

the licensing of attorneys (and other service providers)

rectify some market failure and improve consumer welfare, or