Wednesday, December 5, 2007
An interesting decision yesterday from the Indiana Supreme Court deals with the civil implications of a possible violation of Rule 1.8(a)(business transaction with client). The client was a construction company that built the lawyer's home. The lawyer drafted the contract, which may have standard, but also was involved in contract revisions. When the client was sued by a supplier of materials, the lawyer and his spouse were brought in as third party defendants. The lawyer contended that the rule was inapplicable in light of the comment that excludes standard transactions in the ordinary course of the client's business. The court held that summary judgment for the lawyer was improper as there were potential issues of fiduciary breach and fair dealing. (Mike Frisch).