Jake is a 25-year-old paralegal at a post-Superbowl party. In attendance at the party is his college friend, Mike. Both guys are enjoying themselves. There were a lot of people smoking marijuana, including Mike, drinking beer, eating pretzels, and just having a good time. Jake was the designated driver for his friends, so he did not smoke or drink. At the end of the party, Mike said to Jake, "You are a paralegal. I haven't been drinking at all but I was smoked a lot of marijuana and I'm pretty high. Please tell me if I can drive home." In response, Jakes tells him: Oh, I know the Ohio law on this. You can definitely drive home. You did not drink anything and only cocaine is considered a drug for driving purposes. I am sure the police won't stop you but even if they do, the law is on your side. Unfortunately, it turns out that Jake was incorrect. Mike veered off the road and ended up driving into a tree, damaging his car. When the police came, they took a blood sample from Mike and found that he was driving under the influence of marijuana, which is illegal in Ohio. The officers' immediately arrested him and jailed for 3 days. Later on, points are added to his license. Mike comes to your office and meets with your supervising attorney, Roberta, to discuss the possibility of suing Jake based on his statement to Mike and Mike's reliance on it. Because Jake sincerely believed that what he was saying was true, Roberta immediately rules out the possibility of suing him for fraud or misrepresentation. (Note: This means you should NOT deal with the possibility of suing him for fraud or misrepresentation or the like!) Instead, Mike says to Roberta, "Well, Jake isn't a lawyer. Isn't it wrong for him to tell me what the Ohio law is when he's not even a lawyer?" Roberta replies, "Well, I know that it's unethical and even criminal to practice law without a license, but I don't know if you can sue someone for unauthorized practice of law. I'll have my star paralegal look into that." After Mike leaves, Roberta asks you to research this question, i.e., whether Mike can sue Jake based on his unauthorized practice of law, and to get back to him with an answer.