5. Which of the following real estate documents may a title insurance agent prepare in any transaction?
Deed of Trust (fill in blanks)
Mortgage (fill in blanks)
Easement
A title insurance agent may prepare only the documents that are set forth in 3-1004 (A) (5) which are limited to, “In
closing…deeds, releases which do not affect judgment liens, deeds of reconveyance, title affidavits, closing
statements, and related documents.” 3-1004 (A) (7) provides, “No counsel or advice shall be given with respect to the
meaning, validity, or legal effect of the document or regarding the rights and obligations of the parties.” The selection
of the appropriate document whether a mortgage or a deed of trust is a decision that affects the legal rights of the
entity or person. See 3-1001 (B). Thus, the selection and preparation of a deed of trust or a mortgage even if it is just
to fill in the blanks is considered the unauthorized practice of law. It would be impossible to prepare an easement
without violating 3-1004 (A) (7) with regard to giving advice with respect to the meaning, validity, or legal effect of
the document or the rights and obligations of the parties. Thus, a licensed attorney and not a title agent should prepare
the mortgage, deed of trust and easement. A title insurance agent would be committing the unauthorized practice of
law if he/she prepared these documents for a party to a transaction.
6. With regard to “title affidavits” referred to in Section 3-1004(A) (5) of UPL, would the following fall within that
category?
(a) Marketable title affidavit
(b) Scrivener’s affidavit
(c) Name discrepancy affidavit
Yes.
7. May an attorney who is an active member, in good standing, of the Nebraska Bar, an employee of a title agency
and is a title insurance agent, prepare any of the following either on behalf of the title agency or one of the parties
to a real estate transaction:
Purchase agreement, addendums to purchase agreements, documents listed in 5. above, affidavits not permitted
under section 3-1004 (A) (5) of UPL.
A title company, even if acting through an attorney employee in good standing with the Nebraska Bar, may not
engage in work that exceeds the limitations set forth in the UPL Rules. The title company is a “nonlawyer” as defined
in 3-1002(A). The lawyer is certainly not held to a more restrictive level of document preparation than is the
nonlawyer. Therefore, a title company acting through an attorney employee in good standing with the Nebraska Bar
may engage in any of the activities permitted by 3-1004 (A) (1) through (7).
There are other exceptions in 3-1004 that address whether an entity or organization acting through an in-house lawyer
is engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, including, without limitation, 3-1004 (O) through (R).
For example, under 3-1004 (O), the title company would not be engaged in unauthorized practice of law if its lawyer
employee provides document preparation or other legal services for the title company or other entities within the same
organization (as defined in 3-1002(C) , or, if the title company is privately held, for the other parties described in 3-
1004 (O).
However, unless permitted by a specific exception in 3-1004, the preparation of the documents described in question
number 7 by a title company on behalf of the parties to a real estate transaction would constitute the unauthorized
practice of law. This conclusion is true whether or not the title insurance company is acting through an employee who
is a member of good standing of the Nebraska Bar.
If a lawyer is an employee of a title company and has an attorney/client relationship, independent of the title insurance
company’s relationship, with a party to the transaction in which the title company is involved, the lawyer may prepare
documents that may not be prepared by the title company. The lawyer may bill, his client, the party to the transaction,
for the service of preparing the documents. If, however, the title company charges a fee for the preparation of such
documents, for the reasons stated above, the title company is engaging in the unauthorized practice of law. This
opinion does not address any issues of professional responsibility that may arise in this situation.