Opinion ID: 2147333
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Rejection of Argument Regarding Unsettled Point of Law

Text: McGrath North claimed that Nebraska case law provided an undefined exception to the fiduciary duty rule prohibiting corporate officers and directors from competing against the corporation of which they serve. McGrath North argued that it attempted to qualify Bellino for this exception by advising him to take an above-board approach when he incorporated Keno and submitted a bid for the La Vista keno contract in competition with Lottery. It advised Bellino to cooperate with Anderson in submitting a bid on behalf of Lottery even while preparing a bid on behalf of Keno, to continue to allow Lottery to rent space in a building owned by Bellino if Lottery successfully retained the keno contract, and to refrain from submitting a competing bid in the name of Bellino's wife. McGrath North asserted that even though it was unsuccessful in qualifying Bellino for the undefined exception to the fiduciary duty rule, the attorneys had not committed malpractice. The district court found that the evidence, viewed in a light most favorable to Bellino, did not show that the attorneys informed Bellino about any undefined exception to the rule prohibiting an officer or director from competing against his current corporation.