Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court
Three lawyers have filled a lawsuit against the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania asking that a state law that guarantees any individual the right to be represented in unemployment claim cases by counsel or other duly authorized agent be declared unconstitutional. They argue that the 'other duly authorized agent' option encroaches on the Supreme Court's power to regulate the practice of law. They want the non-attorney option to be eliminated so that businesses are required to be represented by counsel in all unemployment claims.
To convince the court to uphold the current law, the National Federation of Independent Business Legal Foundation, along with other business allies, filed an amicus brief urging the court to preserve the authority for non-attorney representation. Unemployment proceedings are not legal proceedings requiring the use of attorneys. An unemployment hearing is far more speedy and informal--there is no judge, no discovery, no right to a jury, and the rules of evidence do not apply. NFIB has argued that forcing business owners to hire an attorney for these proceedings is unnecessary and will only serve as an additional barrier for small businesses who want to defend themselves against frivolous claims.
Status: PENDING. Amicus brief filed in support of the state Sept. 22, 2006. | 
