Reply – Re: The Simplistic Nature of CR(tm)
Your Name
or Cancel
In Reply To
Re: The Simplistic Nature of CR(tm)
— by liberated liberated
Attorneys do not have licenses to practice law. That term was changed years ago when people, including myself, files motions of sham because attorneys used to provide affidavits in cases that stated they were "licensed in the State of Florida" and when I requested from the County, the Bar, Secretary of State and the Supreme Court of Florida to produce such license they all came back no such license exists. Accordingly, a sham upon the court...which caused dismissal with prejudice. Subsequently, they use the term authorized to practice law or similar language.  When they go after somebody that appears to be practicing law or giving legal advice they don't prosecute on the basis of "no license to practice law" but rather charged with the "unauthorized practice of law". While it appears to be a name game or play on words attorneys do not have licenses. That said the Supreme Court has oversight and authority over attorneys. As pointed out since the Supreme Court of the State has such authority over them it appears to be a waste of time to go anywhere else but the Supreme Court.