Legal Opinion · Dissent

Keuffer v. O.F. Mossberg & Sons, Inc.

Montana Supreme Court

Decided May 31, 2016No. DA 15-0349Published

1DissentJustice Baker

¶24 I dissent.

¶25 The Court today upholds the District Court’s disqualification order without reasoned analysis of the applicable Rule. When Luke Keuffer contacted the Tarlow & Stonecipher firm “about the possibility of forming a client-lawyer relationship,” he became a prospective client pursuant to M. R. Prof. Cond. 1.20(a). It is undisputed, however, that the Keuffers never established a client-attorney relationship with the Tarlow & Stonecipher firm. In Perry, we recognized that Rule 1.20 requires examination of whether a lawyer received information from a prospective client that could be…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Mowrer v. EddieMontana Supreme Court · 1999
  2. In Re the Guardianship & Conservatory of A.M.M.Montana Supreme Court · 2015
  3. Pro-Hand Services Trust v. MontheiMontana Supreme Court · 2002

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API