Source: https://stus.com/Ethics-and-Professsionalism
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 16:22:18+00:00

Document:
Affirmative fraud, rule 10-b5 violation, failure to disclose, causation, concealment, misrepresentation, reliance.
Real estate brokers must disclose prospective purchasers and not engage in self-dealing as fiduciaries, act in good faith, and disclose all information that is or may be material to their clients' rights and interests.
Dolphin and Bradbury, Inc. v. Securities and Exchange Commission; Because investors rely on the reputation, integrity, independence, and expertise of an underwriter, the underwriter has a obligation to investigate and disclose material facts.
S.E.C. v. McNulty; Ordinarily, the conduct of an attorney is imputed to his client, since allowing a party to evade the consequences of the acts or omissions of his freely selected agent would be inconsistent with system of representative litigation.
Rico v. Mitsubishi Motors Corp; When a lawyer inadvertently receives materials that obviously appear to be subject to attorney-client privilege or otherwise confidential and privileged, the lawyer must immediately notify the sender.
McQueen, Rains & Tresch LLP v. CITGO Petroleum Corp; Non-refundable retainer fees and other non-refundable provisions in attorney fee agreements will be upheld if reasonable; sophisticated client; contract is in writing; incurred expenses.
Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC; Once a party reasonably anticipates litigation, it must suspend its routine document retention/destruction policy and put in place a litigation hold to ensure the preservation of relevant documents; spoliation.
Jovanovic v. City of New York; To prevail on a claim for denial of a fair trial due to prejudicial publicity, the plaintiff must establish (1) improper leaks; (2) in fact denied a fair trial; and (3) other remedies were not available or used to no avail.
Hoyt Properties, Inc. v. Production Resources Group, L.L.C; For an attorney statement in the course of representation to form the basis of a misrepresentation claim, the statement must be more than a legal opinion and must relate to actual facts.
In re Grand Jury Subpoena; for person seeking invoke attorney-client privilege prove client affirmatively sought become client; motion to quash; quash; subpoena duces tecum.
Republican Party of Minnesota v. White; Government regulations suppress speech on basis of content must narrowly tailored to serve compelling state interest; first amendment.
Crews v. Buckman Labs. Int'l, Inc. In-house counsel may bring a common-law action for retaliatory discharge resulting compliance with Code of Professional Responsibility provision that represents a clear and definitive statement of public policy.
The Florida Bar v. Belleville An attorney has an ethical obligation to ensure that his client does not take unfair advantage of an unrepresented adversary.
Fire Ins. Exchange v. Bell. Parties have a right to rely on the representations of opposing counsel as a matter of law.
Viner v. Sweet; plaintiff in a transactional malpractice action must show that but for the alleged malpractice, it is more likely than not that plaintiff would have obtained a more favorable result; but-for causation.
Bakery Machinery & Fabrication, Inc. v. Traditional Baking, Inc.; clients are the principals, the attorney is an agent; under law of agency, principal is bound by agent's deeds, except attorney misconduct outside the scope of employment.
In re Primus; when freedom of association is involved, the state must demonstrate a compelling subordinating interest, and that the means employed is closely drawn to avoid unnecessary abridgement of associational freedoms.
United States v. Carona; the government may use deception in its investigations in order to induce suspects into making incriminating statements, even if reprensented by an attorney. California Rule 2-100.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.