 The
Unintended Client and Non-Engagement Letters
by Thomas P. Sukowicz |
Every year malpractice claims are made against
lawyers by individuals that the lawyers never considered to be their
clients. This occurs because the existence or non-existence of
an attorney-client relationship is not explicitly communicated by
the lawyer.
Generally, courts will recognize an attorney-client
relationship when the attorney’s conduct would lead a reasonable
person to believe that he was being represented by the attorney.
Parker v. Carnahan, 772 S.W.2d 151 (Tex.App. 1989). The
evidence focuses on the conduct and communications of the attorney
and putative client.
Claims by persons considered by the lawyers to
be non-clients usually arise in one of three ways. The first is
when a lawyer declines to represent a person in a matter, and it
is not clear to the prospective client that the lawyer is declining
to represent him. This could happen with a new matter for a current
client as well as for a prospective client.
For example, in Rice v. Forestier, 415 S.W.2d
711 (Tex.App. 1967), a lawyer had represented a husband and wife
and their corporation in various matters when the wife delivered
to the lawyer a citation to answer a suit for the collection of
a debt. No answer was filed and a default judgment was entered.
The attorney admitted that the wife left the citation in his office
with his secretary. The court held that the attorney had a duty
to inform the client that he was not going to file an answer or
defend the case. Although the lawyer had the right to decline to
represent client in this matter, he had an obligated to inform the
client of this decision.
In Rice, the client just dropped off the
citation without further communication with the lawyer, assuming
the lawyer would handle the matter. The same result could occur
if a lawyer agrees to review a matter for a prospective or existing
client and accepts the client’s papers for review. Unless the lawyer
specifically informs the client that he is not accepting the case,
the client may claim that he relied on the lawyer’s silence to mean
that the lawyer was taking the case.
A similar situation could occur in a transaction.
A prospective or existing client might want a lawyer to review a
residential real estate contract that is subject to review by the
parties’ attorneys within a certain number of days after acceptance.
If the client delivers or faxes the contract to the lawyer without
a clear understanding as to whether the lawyer is accepting the
representation, the client may reasonably believe the lawyer is
protecting his interests, and the lawyer may be liable for failing
to do so.
A non-engagement letter under these circumstances
would prevent any misunderstanding about the absence of an attorney-client
relationship. It might include the following language:
We have received [your communication][the documents
you delivered] regarding
[subject matter]. While we appreciate the confidence
you have expressed in our
firm, for various reasons we are unable to represent
you in this matter. We are
returning under cover of this letter the materials
you provided for our review.
When declining to accept a legal matter, lawyers
should be careful in what they communicate to the client. Even
if there is no question that the lawyer is not taking the case,
the lawyer may still be liable to the prospective client for any
legal advice or opinion rendered to the prospective client.
In one case, a woman consulted with a lawyer about
possible medical malpractice claim arising out of injuries to her
husband while in a hospital. The lawyer met with her for about
45 minutes, after which time he told her that the case was not worth
pursuing and that his firm would not represent her. The woman left,
and did not consult another attorney for a year because she believed
that she did not have a case based on the lawyer’s remark. The
jury found that there was an attorney-client relationship between
the couple and the lawyer because the wife went to the lawyer for
legal advice and he gave her an opinion about the merits of the
claim. It also found that there was medical malpractice and that
the couple would have been successful in prosecuting that claim
but for the attorney’s advice. The jury awarded damages to the
husband of $610,500, and to the wife of $39,000. Togstad v.
Vesely, Otto, Miller & Keefe, 291 N.W.2d 686 (Minn. 1980).
In another case, Miller v. Metzinger, 154
Cal.Rptr. 22 (Cal.App. 1979), the plaintiff’s wrongful death case
was dismissed for having been filed after the statute of limitations
had run. The plaintiff had consulted four law firms. The Metzinger
firm was the third. Metzinger ultimately declined to take the case,
but a fact issue as to whether he informed the prospective client
of his declination and that the statute of limitations was about
to expire caused the appellate court to reverse summary judgment
in favor of the lawyer. The court stated that even if the lawyer
had withdrawn a few days before the statute expired, it would be
a breach of duty to fail to inform the client of the statute of
limitations issue and of the need to protect the case by filing
within the prescribed time.
Because courts have found a duty to inform the
client of the requirement of filing within the statutory period,
a non-engagement letter should address that issue, without necessarily
giving an opinion about when the time within which to file will
expire. The non-engagement letter should include language similar
to the following:
Please note that the law limits the time within
which individuals may file law suits. Allowing too much time to
pass may forever bar you from asserting your claim. We are not
providing our opinion as to the date by which you must file any
law suit against [adverse party]. We encourage you, however, to
immediately contact another attorney if you wish to pursue your
claim.
The non-engagement letter should also include a
disclaimer of any legal advice. For example, the letter might include:
In declining to take your case, we are not expressing
an opinion about the merits of your position. We encourage you
to consult with another attorney regarding your case if you so choose.
Our decision not to accept this representation should not be interpreted
as an adverse opinion about the merits of your case.
The second way in which these kinds of claims arise
is when a lawyer is involved in a transaction involving multiple
parties, some of whom are not represented by attorneys, and it is
not clear to all involved which parties the lawyer does not represent.
In Kotzur v. Kelly, 791 S.W.2d 254 (Tex.
App. 1990), the court found that an attorney for a seller of real
estate may be liable to the buyers when the circumstances lead the
buyers to believe that the attorney is representing them and the
lawyer has not made it clear that he was not their attorney. In
that case, the client was selling 225 acres of land to his two sons.
The sons did not retain another attorney, but believed that their
father’s attorney also represented them. When they later learned
of a lien on the property, they sued the lawyer for malpractice.
The sons testified that they thought the lawyer also represented
them. The attorney, apparently was unsure about whether he represented
the sons, testified, “I didn’t feel I was dealing with two different
parties here” and admitted that he prepared the documents related
to the transaction on a “family-type basis.” The court reversed
the summary judgment that had been entered in favor of the lawyer
and remanded the case for trial.
When dealing with unrepresented parties, especially
when they are related to the client or are partners of the client,
it is crucial to have a writing that clarifies who the lawyer represents
and who the lawyer does not represent. A letter to the unrepresented
parties may contain language similar to the following:
I enjoyed [meeting you] [talking with you] yesterday
regarding [legal matter]. As I mentioned, I am only representing
[client] in this matter. I am not representing you and cannot advise
you regarding your interests in this matter. You should consider
consulting with a lawyer of your choice.
The third way in which claims by persons considered
by the lawyers to be non-clients usually arise is when a lawyer
terminates his representation, and it is not clear to the client
that the lawyer’s representation has ended. Generally, an attorney’s
liability for malpractice terminates when the relationship ends.
In most cases, this occurs when the lawyer completes the client’s
objective. Maddox v. Burlingame, 205 Mich.App. 446 (1994).
Sometimes, however, even though the lawyer considers the professional
relationship to have ended, it is not clear to the client that the
relationship is over.
In In re Smith, 91 B.R. 612 (Bkrtcy.M.D.Fla.,1988),
a bankruptcy court considered the issue of whether a lawyer continued
to represent a client in a matter involving the release of a guaranty
of certain debts of the client. The lawyer claimed that, at the
time of the transaction, he was no longer representing that client.
The lawyer had represented the client for over a decade. The court
held that, once an attorney-client relationship exists, the attorney
has the affirmative duty to notify the client of the termination
of the relationship. Because there was nothing in the record indicating
that the lawyer ever notified the client that the attorney-client
relationship had been terminated, and because the client testified
that he considered the lawyer to be his attorney, the court concluded
that the lawyer had a continuing duty to the client.
In terms of malpractice avoidance, a “disengagement”
letter to the client not only will serve to document the discharge
of the lawyer’s duty in the event of a dispute, but it should also
signal to the client, in concrete terms, that the attorney-client
relationship has ended. Consider sending a disengagement letter
at the conclusion of each matter you undertake for a client. The
letter might include language similar to the following:
We are pleased to have represented you for the
past [time period] in [legal matter]. This will confirm that our
engagement to represent you in this matter has concluded. We will
take no further action regarding this matter. We are returning
to you under cover of this letter [documents] related to your case.
The absence of non-engagement and disengagement
letters has contributed to the filing of legal malpractice claims
by persons to whom lawyers believed they owed no duty. Sending
such letters may prevent the initiation of malpractice claims or
even defeat claims by such persons. The time it takes to write
these letters may be the most important time you spend on the matter.
| 
