Professional conduct

[questioner23]

Jurisdiction

Ohio

Briefly, my neighbor sued me over a split rail fence that we wanted to take down claiming it was on their property, would cost 30,000 dollars to move (we offered to give them the fence posts and rails), and was a bluebird nesting sanctuary, among other claims.

We proved the fence was on our property through a detailed property survey of each post. Ultimately an agreement was made that they would move the fence off of our property and if it was cost less than 3k they would get some monies from us. The outcome is now done and it is probably not of importance to my question.

But in the end it cost only 1200 for them to move the fence. Knowing that the fence was on our property and they had other estimates to move the fence for considerably less, did the attorney representing our neighbor have a responsibility to stop the proceedings once he knew the fence was on our property? I have been reading Ohio Professional Rules of Conduct and we plan to file a complaint with the Ohio State Bar Association to have this lawyers professional conduct and ethics reviewed. I just don't know how to word the information and what the Bar would need. Thank you for your time in reading this.

 

[adjusterjack]

, did the attorney representing our neighbor have a responsibility to stop the proceedings once he knew the fence was on our property?

No.

Until you proved it in court, with convincing evidence, he had no obligation to do anything other than continue to represent his client, even if it meant disputing your survey.

He had the right, on behalf of his client, to question your surveyor in court, determine his qualifications and question the authenticity and accuracy of the survey.

My guess is that you'll get nowhere with your complaint.

 

[Tax Counsel]

But in the end it cost only 1200 for them to move the fence. Knowing that the fence was on our property and they had other estimates to move the fence for considerably less, did the attorney representing our neighbor have a responsibility to stop the proceedings once he knew the fence was on our property?

No. And I'm perplexed why you think he would have had any responsibility to do that. And, moreover, I've no idea why you think it raises an ethical issue. What harm was done here? Perhaps you left out something important or just didn't explain it well.

The lawyer's duty is to zealously represent his/her client. If there is a dispute over whose land the fence is on, they are entitled to litigate that and get a decision from the court on it.

 

[zddoodah]

Ultimately an agreement was made that they would move the fence

So...the case was settled and dismissed?

Knowing that the fence was on our property and they had other estimates to move the fence for considerably less, did the attorney representing our neighbor have a responsibility to stop the proceedings once he knew the fence was on our property?

I'm really confused about these estimates. In the first paragraph of your post, you mentioned $30,000. Then you said something about $3,000, and then it went down to $1,200, but now you're saying the neighbor had estimates for less than that? Huh?

As far as your question goes, I'm not really sure what you're asking, but your question seems to be dependent on exactly when the lawyer "knew" something and what happened after that (which you didn't tell us). Any sort of unequivocal response either way is without basis in fact.

I just don't know how to word the information and what the Bar would need. Thank you for your time in reading this.

You should provide all information that you believe is relevant to your complaint. If the OSBA wants more, it will ask.

Until you proved it in court, with convincing evidence, he had no obligation to do anything other than continue to represent his client, even if it meant disputing your survey.

That's not entirely accurate. For starters, "convincing evidence" isn't a term that has any meaning in the legal world. Some civil claims must be proved by "clear and convincing evidence," but this isn't one of them, and applicable burden was a "preponderance of the evidence" (i.e., more likely than not). Second, if a lawyer becomes aware of evidence that is fatal to his/her client's case, then the lawyer may have a duty not to further prosecute the claim.