Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Ten Years After Burrow V. Arce: The Current State Of Attorney Fee Forfeiture., Jeffrey A. Webb, Blake W. Stribling
Ten Years After Burrow V. Arce: The Current State Of Attorney Fee Forfeiture., Jeffrey A. Webb, Blake W. Stribling
St. Mary's Law Journal
“Extreme [attorney] misconduct may warrant an extreme remedy.” Fee forfeiture certainly constitutes an extreme remedy, at least compared to the ordinary remedy for violation of a legal duty. But neither the degree to which the remedy is extreme nor how extreme the misconduct must first be before the forfeiture becomes appropriate is apparent in light of the Texas Supreme Court’s decision in Burrow v. Arce. Understanding the confusion which has arisen with regard to Burrow’s impact depends in large measure on a thorough evaluation of (1) the basis for the court’s determinations relating to forfeiture, (2) the sources from which …
Loyalty In Limbo: The Peculiar Case Of Attorneys' Loyalty To Clients., Eli Wald
Loyalty In Limbo: The Peculiar Case Of Attorneys' Loyalty To Clients., Eli Wald
St. Mary's Law Journal
Attorney loyalty to clients is considered a cornerstone of the attorney-client relationship. Yet, loyalty is underexplored, misunderstood, and the subject of heated discord. Advocates of client-centered loyalty and their opponents both fail to provide a compelling accounting of loyalty to clients and its consequences. Leaving loyalty in limbo is an unacceptable state of affairs. The legal profession bears the continuous burden of accounting for its own practices. Because the Bar cannot assert broad client-centered loyalty as self-explanatory, the burden of disproving loyalty shifts to the critics. Critics of broad loyalty to clients are not helping advance the discourse by advocating …