Rafel Law Group PLLC v. Defoor
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtDwyer, J.
¶1 Rule of Professional Conduct 1.8(a) prohibits an attorney from entering into a business transaction with a client or acquiring an interest adverse to the client unless the attorney satisfies certain requirements designed to protect the client’s interest. However, with one *212exception not applicable herein, business transactions entered into with prospective clients or in anticipation of establishing an attorney-client relationship do not fall within the scope of the rule. Here, Stacey Defoor’s attorney-client relationship with Rafel Law Group had not yet commenced at the time the parties…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Mt. Park Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. v. TydingsWashington Supreme Court · 1994
- Eriks v. DenverWashington Supreme Court · 1992
- Sheikh v. ChoeWashington Supreme Court · 2006
- Aba Sheikh v. ChoeWashington Supreme Court · 2006
- In Re the Disciplinary Proceeding Against McGlothlenWashington Supreme Court · 1983
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Calvert v. MayberryColorado Court of Appeals · 2016
- Geoffrey Chism, Appellant, v. Tri-State Construction, Inc., Et Al., RespondentsCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016
- In the Matter of James C. WollrabSupreme Court of Colorado · 2018
- Maziar v. Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014
- Calvert v. MayberryColorado Court of Appeals · 2016
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.