The issues presently before the court in this divorce action arise out of plaintiff's efforts to discharge her counsel and to substitute a non-lawyer, Theodore Kamasinski, as her "attorney-in- fact." Based largely, although not entirely, upon Mr. Kamasinski's appearance, plaintiff has moved to recuse the undersigned justice from continuing to preside over the case. The defendant objects to the recusal motion and seeks to bar Kamasinski's appearance on the grounds that he is engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.