Ark. Code Ann. § 16-22-211 (2026)
Corporations or associations — Practice of law or solicitation prohibited — Exceptions — Penalty
- It shall be unlawful for any corporation or voluntary association to practice or appear as an attorney at law for any person in any court in this state or before any judicial body, to make it a business to practice as an attorney at law for any person in any of the courts, to hold itself out to the public as being entitled to practice law, to tender or furnish legal services or advice, to furnish attorneys or counsel, to render legal services of any kind in actions or proceedings of any nature or in any other way or manner, or in any other manner to assume to be entitled to practice law or to assume or advertise the title of lawyer or attorney, attorney at law, or equivalent terms in any language in such a manner as to convey the impression that it is entitled to practice law or to furnish legal advice, service, or counsel or to advertise that either alone or together with or by or through any person, whether a duly and regularly admitted attorney at law or not, it has, owns, conducts, or maintains a law office or any office for the practice of law or for furnishing legal advice, services, or counsel.
- It also shall be unlawful for any corporation or voluntary association to solicit itself by or through its officers, agents, or employees any claim or demand for the purpose of bringing an action thereon or of representing as attorney at law or for furnishing legal advice, services, or counsel to a person sued or about to be sued in any action or proceeding or against whom an action or proceeding has been or is about to be brought, or who may be affected by any action or proceeding that has been or may be instituted in any court or before any judicial body, or for the purpose of so representing any person in the pursuit of any civil remedy.
- The fact that any officer, trustee, director, agent, or employee shall be a duly and regularly admitted attorney at law shall not be held to permit or allow any such corporation or voluntary association to do the acts prohibited in this section, nor shall that fact be a defense upon the trial of any of the persons mentioned for a violation of the provisions of this section.
-
This section does not apply to a:
-
For-profit corporation or voluntary association lawfully engaged in:
- The examination and insuring of titles to real property; or
- Employing an attorney or attorneys in and about its own immediate affairs or in any litigation to which it is or may become a party;
- Nonprofit corporation or voluntary association lawfully engaged in representing or assisting an indigent, poor, or disadvantaged person as a client in a civil or criminal matter, if any legal services rendered by the nonprofit corporation or voluntary association are furnished through licensed attorneys in accordance with rules governing the practice of law in Arkansas; or
-
Nonprofit corporation, voluntary association, or instrumentality of the government recognized under 26 U.S.C. § 115 that is engaged in representing or assisting as a client in a civil matter one (1) of the following entities, if any legal services rendered are furnished through licensed attorneys in accordance with rules governing the practice of law in Arkansas:
- A city, county, or public school district;
- The officers and employees of a city, county, or public school district;
- A self-funding group of a city, county, or public school district as required under § 14-60-101 et seq., § 14-26-101 et seq., or § 6-17-1401 et seq.; or
- A self-insurance risk pool of a city, county, or public school district.
-
For-profit corporation or voluntary association lawfully engaged in:
-
- Nothing contained in this section shall be construed to prevent a corporation from furnishing to any person lawfully engaged in the practice of law such information or such clerical services in and about his or her professional work as may be lawful, except for the provisions of this section, if at all times the lawyer receiving such information or such services shall maintain full professional and direct responsibility to his or her clients for the information and services so received.
- However, no corporation shall be permitted to render any services that cannot lawfully be rendered by a person not admitted to practice law in this state nor to solicit directly or indirectly professional employment for a lawyer.
-
- Any corporation or voluntary association violating any of the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a violation and punished by a fine of not less than one hundred dollars ($100) nor more than five thousand dollars ($5,000).
- Every officer, trustee, director, agent, or employee of the corporation or voluntary association who directly or indirectly engages in any of the acts prohibited in this section or assists such a corporation or voluntary association to do such prohibited acts shall be guilty of a violation and shall be punished by a fine of not less than one hundred dollars ($100) nor more than five thousand dollars ($5,000).
History. Acts 1929, No. 182, §§ 1-6; Pope's Dig., §§ 3630-3635; Acts 1958 (2nd Ex. Sess.), No. 11, § 1; A.S.A. 1947, §§ 25-205 — 25-210; Acts 2005, No. 1994, § 82; 2011, No. 858, § 1; 2017, No. 558, § 1.
Amendments. The 2011 amendment added (d)(2); inserted “For-profit” at the beginning of (d)(1); and deleted “nor shall it prohibit a corporation or a voluntary association from” at the beginning of (d)(1)(B).
The 2017 amendment substituted “does” for “shall” in the introductory language of (d); in (d)(2), substituted “if” for “provided that”, substituted “the nonprofit” for “a nonprofit”, and deleted “duly” preceding “licensed”; and added (d)(3).
Research References
ALR.
What constitutes unauthorized practice of law by paralegal. 109 A.L.R.5th 275.
Ark. L. Notes.
Laurence, Recent Developments in the Arkansas Law of Garnishment: Does a Corporate Garnishee Need a Lawyer to Answer the Writ?, 1997 Ark. L. Notes 95.
Ark. L. Rev.
Legal Profession — Unauthorized Practice — Practice of Law by Banks, 9 Ark. L. Rev. 67.
Professional Corporations — A Current Appraisal, 23 Ark. L. Rev. 215.
Swimming Upstream: A Final Attempt at Persuasion on the Issue of Corporate Pro Se Representation in Arkansas State Court, 54 Ark. L. Rev. 475 (2001).
Rachel A. Orr, Recent Developments: Nonlawyer's Pro Se Representation of a Corporation in Arbitration Proceedings Constitutes the Unauthorized Practice of Law, 65 Ark. L. Rev. 517 (2012).
Dwayne D. Hedges, Case Note: Brown v. Kelton: The Arkansas Prohibition on the Use of Employee Attorneys to Defend the Insured, 65 Ark. L. Rev. 953 (2012).
Suzannah R. McCord, Comment: Corporate Self-Representation: Is It Truly the Unauthorized Practice of Law?, 67 Ark. L. Rev. 371 (2014).
U. Ark. Little Rock L. Rev.
Pierce G. Hunter, Note: Constitutional Law — Unauthorized Practice of Law: Driving Legal Business Without a License, 36 U. Ark. Little Rock L. Rev. 201 (2014).
Case Notes
Activities Not Prohibited.
A banking corporation is not engaged in the unauthorized practice of law when it advertises its services as a fiduciary, recommends that the public consult with their attorneys, and does not attempt to perform legal services in general. A banking corporation, through its employee attorneys, is not engaged in the unauthorized practice of law when it compiles and drafts inventories and accounts in probate. Ark. Bar Ass'n v. Union Nat'l Bank, 224 Ark. 48, 273 S.W.2d 408 (1954).
Appearance.
An appeal in an action by a foreign corporation was dismissed where, inter alia, the corporation was not represented by a person authorized to practice law in Arkansas. Roma Leathers, Inc. v. Ramey, 68 Ark. App. 1, 2 S.W.3d 82 (1999).
Arbitration Proceedings.
Nonlawyer's representation of a corporation in arbitration proceedings constitutes the unauthorized practice of law. Arbitration proceedings bear significant indicia of legal proceedings under the Uniform Arbitration Act, which has been adopted by Arkansas, and if a hearing is held during arbitration, the parties have the right to be heard, present evidence material to the controversy, and cross-examine witnesses appearing at the hearing. NISHA, LLC v. TriBuilt Constr. Group, LLC, 2012 Ark. 130, 388 S.W.3d 444 (2012).
Insurers.
Insurance company was prohibited by this section from appointing one of its in-house attorneys to represent a defendant insured in litigation arising out of an accident. It was undisputed that the insurer was not and would not become a party to the lawsuit as provided in one of the exceptions to this section. Brown v. Kelton, 2011 Ark. 93, 380 S.W.3d 361 (2011).
Self-Representation.
A banking corporation cannot practice law directly or indirectly through employee attorneys, except that it may represent itself in the courts through employee attorneys in its own business affairs. Ark. Bar Ass'n v. Union Nat'l Bank, 224 Ark. 48, 273 S.W.2d 408 (1954).
Although individuals may represent themselves, corporations must be represented by licensed attorneys. All City Glass & Mirror, Inc. v. McGraw Hill Info. Sys. Co., 295 Ark. 520, 750 S.W.2d 395 (1988).
Unlawful Practice.
A banking corporation, through its employee attorneys, is engaged in the unauthorized practice of law when its attorneys draft fiduciary instruments, prepare and file court papers, appear in court in pending litigation or to invoke processes for its beneficiaries, cofiduciaries or others than the corporation, or advise persons other than the corporation as to legal matters. Ark. Bar Ass'n v. Union Nat'l Bank, 224 Ark. 48, 273 S.W.2d 408 (1954).
Where abstract and title insurance companies draft and prepare for others instruments involving real property and do title examination and curative work for others, they are engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. Beach Abstract & Guar. Co. v. Bar Ass'n, 230 Ark. 494, 362 S.W.2d 900 (1959).
County, circuit, and appellate courts lacked jurisdiction over a corporate taxpayer's appeal because, while the taxpayer maintained that it was represented by an attorney at all stages of the case, its petitions for appeal filed in county court were signed by its accounting manager and not its attorney, the accounting manager was practicing law in violation of Arkansas law when he signed the petitions, and the petitions were null and void. Stephens Prod. Co. v. Bennett, 2015 Ark. App. 617 (2015).
Despite § 26-27-318(a)(1)(A) and a property owner's right to appeal an assessment, corporations are prohibited from acting pro se or representing themselves in legal actions. Desoto Gathering Co., LLC v. Hill, 2017 Ark. 326, 531 S.W.3d 396 (2017).
Circuit court did not err in dismissing a company's tax assessment appeal for lack of jurisdiction when its tax manager, a nonlawyer, initiated the appeal on its behalf because the company invoked the legal process and its nonattorney representative engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. Because the notices of appeals were consequently a nullity and the deadline for filing an appeal under § 26-27-318 had lapsed when the amended notices were filed, the petitions of appeal were a nullity. Desoto Gathering Co., LLC v. Hill, 2017 Ark. 326, 531 S.W.3d 396 (2017).
Validity of Instruments Unlawfully Prepared.
Deed prepared by nonlawyer, who also gives advice as to its legal effect, is not void, although amounting to the unauthorized practice of law, since this section only penalizes the persons engaged in the unlawful practice. Gaylor v. Gaylor, 224 Ark. 644, 275 S.W.2d 644 (1955).
Cited: Ark. Bar Ass'n v. Union Nat'l Bank, 224 Ark. 48, 273 S.W.2d 408 (1954); SMG 1054, Inc. v. Thompson, 2014 Ark. App. 149 (2014); SMG 1054, Inc. v. Thompson, 2014 Ark. App. 524, 443 S.W.3d 574 (2014).