Opinion ID: 1152845
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Did the attorney receive an implied consent to enter the damaged building through custom, usage, or conduct?

Text: The attorney states in his brief, This Court should take judicial notice of the fact that heretofore lawyers representing insurance companies have regularly gone on to fire damaged property without giving notice to the insured, as normal procedure. The attorney uses this premise for his assertion that consent may be implied from custom, usage, or conduct. The attorney analogizes the case sub judice to Florida Publishing Co. v. Fletcher, 340 So.2d 914 (Fla. 1976), which involved a charge of trespass against a photographer who entered the scene of a fire at the request of the fire marshal. The Florida Supreme Court held that an entry that may otherwise be an actual trespass becomes lawful and unactionable when it is done under common usage, custom, and practice. However, this case is distinguished from Fletcher on the basis that the entry of the photographer in Fletcher was by invitation of the fire marshal and was part of the official investigation of the fire. The Court notes that the timing of the entry in Fletcher is distinguishable from the timing of the Mississippi attorney's entry which was several days after the fire and was not part of the official investigation thereof. Furthermore, this Court agrees with the State Bar that custom is not a defense to a bar disciplinary action. In Re Wines, 370 S.W.2d 328 (Mo. 1963). A custom may not be regarded as a complete vindication when a lawyer is charged with misrepresentation. Id. at 334. The case of Helling v. Carey, 84 Wash.2d 514, 519 P.2d 981 (1974) is also supportive here. Helling involved a patient who brought suit against her ophthalmologist to recover for damages she received due to the failure of the defendant to detect her glaucoma. Helling held that just because a certain practice is the standard for a certain professional in a community, does not mean the practice is lawful. Helling has been cited with approval by this Court in Hall v. Hilbun, 466 So.2d 856 (Miss. 1985). There is no implied consent from the usage, custom or conduct of investigators or insurance defense counsel absent contractual consent or notice to the insured.