I have read quite a few articles where you...
I don't know how to exactly put it other than to say you recommend
people get legal advice from an attorney-at-law rather than a
paralegal or a person on the Internet.
At times, I think that is wise.
However, I would be interested in hearing your perspective on
clarifying the issue.
What is the point, in general, where advice from a paralegal or a
person on the Internet is not sufficient and one needs to seek the
advice of an attorney-at-law?
I mean, we have a huge range here:
I don't presume to believe you would think if someone asked if it was
legal to murder someone in the United States and someone who was not
an attorney-at-law said "Yes", you would criticize him and say "Don't
trust that person -- contact an attorney." Maybe you would?
On the other hand, we have huge corporations involved in complex
litigation where one would have to be an idiot to trust advice from a
Where do YOU draw the line? Where do YOU think one needs at
attorney-at-law and one where general advice from someone such as a
paralegal is sufficient?