Court Opinion

ID: 8294556
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-10-17 10:59:16.340475+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:43:58.678348
License: Public Domain

Justice PLEICONES.
I concur in the result reached by the majority but am troubled by the imposition of a new duty forcing an attorney to conduct a “reasonable” investigation so as to comply with *441§ 15-36-20. In my opinion, this new responsibility places upon an attorney an additional requirement not currently required by statute. I would not create a blanket rule that precludes an attorney from obtaining a reasonable belief in the merits of a case based solely on information related to him by a client.
I agree that, based on the facts of this case, appellant filed the action primarily for a purpose other than securing the proper adjudication of the claim upon which the proceedings were based. I would affirm the lower court but see no need to impose additional duties on an attorney beyond that which is required by statute.