About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

Case Citations [1] (2017)

handle is hein.ali/rettlglyrs0054 and id is 1 raw text is: 




§ 14. Formation of a Client-Lawyer Relationship

Iowa, 2016. Subsec. (1)(b) cit. in case cit. in sup. State disciplinary board charged lawyer with violating
the rules of professional conduct in connection with allegations that, following her removal as the
attorney for an estate in probate proceedings, she sought and received a loan from the executor without
obtaining the executor's informed consent. After the grievance commission found that lawyer violated
the rules, this court suspended her license for 60 days, holding that she was still in an attomey-client
relationship with the executor at the time of the loan. The court noted that, under Restatement Third of
the Law Governing Lawyers § 14, an attorney-client relationship normally existed between the executor
of an estate and the attorney designated by the executor to probate the estate, and explained that, under
the circumstances here, lawyer's attorney-client relationship with the executor had not yet ended when
attorney and executor discussed the loan. Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Bd. v. Pederson,
887 N.W.2d  387, 392.


§ 16. A Lawyer's Duties to a Client-In General

C.A.9, 2017. Quot. in sup. Attorney who formerly worked for county attorney's office sued county and
county officials, alleging that defendants terminated her in violation of her First Amendment rights after
she publicly commented on county's settlement of a lawsuit in which the county sheriff's department
was accused of brutality towards protesters. The district court entered judgment on a jury verdict for
plaintiff on her First Amendment claim. Reversing, this court held that attorney's public comment was
made in her official capacity and thus not protected by the First Amendment. The court reasoned, in
part, that plaintiff s public comment fell under the broad set of official duties she owed county as its
attorney under Arizona law and Restatement Third of the Law Governing Lawyers § 16. Brandon v.
Maricopa County, 849 F.3d 837, 845.

Iowa, 2017. Cit. in sup. In disciplinary proceedings, attorney was charged with violating the state's
ethical rules by simultaneously representing two clients on opposing sides of a loan transaction. The
grievance commission recommended  a 30-day suspension. This court imposed a 60-day suspension
based on attorney's violation of rules providing that a lawyer could not represent a client if the
representation of that client would involve a concurrent conflict of interest with another client, unless the
lawyer obtained informed consent from both clients in writing. The court reasoned that attorney failed to
fulfill his general obligations under Restatement Third of the Law Governing Lawyers § 16, because he

           For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 3,000 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

profiles profiles most