The Grangeville globe. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho) 1907-1922, 1912-10-24
COURT RENDERS
INTERESTING DECISION
Attorney can not Acquire Estate; Duty to Client Defined
Verdict of Lower Court Reversed.

quence of his employment under his
contract. and he paid the plaintiffs
every dollar and the whole thereof
which he received for them from
said estate, and that his employment
was fully and finally terminated: that
oy reason of such facts the plaintiffs
nave no claim to said land or title
or interest therein.
Inc respondent in this case is
member of the bar and a practicing
attorney of the state of Iowa. and the
contract Of employment entered into
between the respondent and the ap-
peHants was made In the state of
Iowa The supreme court of that
state, in a number Of cases, has been
called upon to consider contracts of
employment Of an attorney, and the
duties and responsibilities of an at
oorney when employed, and in the
case OF Harper VS.. Perry, 20 L., 81,
the court used this language:
THE rules of law governing the
transactions Of an attorney with his
client are most strict, and operate to
protect the client from any advantage
that may be possessed by the attorney
ON account of superior knowledge or
confidence reposed in him by the
Client What the law does not consid
er unfair dealing between other par
ties, where no fiduciary relation ex-
lists, will frequently not be sustained
as between attorney and client. While
the relation exists, an attorney is not
permitted to take advantage of the
clients affairs, against his interests,
to make money. The hardship Of the
doctrine. In it's application to particu-
lar cases, is not so much regarded as
the public mischief which would grow
out Of lax rules permitting the attor-
ney to take advantage of his position
and knowledge and the confidence of
his client, In order to make advan-
tageOus transactions for himself. No
rule, in Its application, has a more
beneficial effect upon the pecuniary
interests, or more effectually pro
notes the dignity of the legal profess
ison. 1t Is the source of the utmost
confidence In the attorney, and se-
cures to the client services meriting
the most generous rewards. It's strict
enforcement is necessary for the prop
er protection of the client. And the
courts will not refrain from its appli-
cation because the wrong to the eli
ent may not be fully apparent in ex-
tent, nor the influence under which
1t was wrought entirely understood.
"The application of this rule for
bids the attorney to purchase, against
the interest of his client, property
sold in the course of litigation, in
which he is retained, and such sales
will be held void, or the attorney will
be held as the trustee of his client,
and required to account as such.''
The respondent being an attorney,
it will be presumed, of course, he
was familiar with the law of the
state of Iowa and the decisions of
the courts of that state. The rule
above announced by the Iowa SUI
preme court is the recognized rule
announced and universally adhered to
by every court in the land, and every
member of the bar who has taken
the oath of office required generally
by the laws of the state is impressed
with the solemnity of the obligation
of such attorney to protect his eli
ents in all his efforts with reference
to his employment, and that such at
torney shall be faithful to, and hon
est in all his actions i'm relation to
such employment.
The statutes of this state prescrib-
ing the duties of attorneys, among
other things provide:
"2. To maintain the respect due to
the courts of justice and the judicial
officers;
90. To counsel or maintain such
proceedings or defenses only
as appear to him legal or just. except
the defense of person charged with
a public offense;
"A. To employ, for the purpose of
maintaining the causes confided to
him. such means only as are consis-
tent with truth, and never seek to
mislead the judges by an artifice or
false statement of fact or law;
go. To maintain inviolate the con-
fidence, and at every peril to himself,
to preserve the secrets of his client"
These high and responsible duties
imposed upon am attorney in his en-
ployment are in line with the rule
that is universally approved and ap-
piled in enforcing the respective obi
cations and RESPONSIBILITIES jmpOsed