P. Witnessing a long running court case.
I tracked down the title for the adjacent parcel. The attorney researched, verified my work and tracked down the heirs. The client does not want to buy the interest from the heirs.
On more than one occasion, the attorney has offered for the two of us to purchase the land together.
Would it be a conflict to obtain an interest in this parcel?
(I know my answer, which is why he has asked on more than one occasion. I'm just curious about the consensus and if somebody else wants to go in with this guy, they can have at it.)
I'd like to know a few more details such as what is your involvement in the case, have you worked for or received any compensation from any of the parties, etc.
But based on what little you mentioned, probably yes. And the mere fact that you had to ask the question indicates to me that you think there may be.
Best advice is say no until after the case is finished. Then worry about making an offer.
Does A Surveyor Owe A Fiduciary Duty ?
The lawyer may have a fiduciary duty, even if you do not.
Is your client claiming possession, adverse or otherwise?
Does your client have some possible claim to title or partial title?
If it is a gore and your client cares not to acquire title then would it not be in the public interest that some body pays taxes on the land?
I am assuming that the lawyer wants your involvement so that he does not have to pay for the survey work.
It may be in the client's best interest that a third party acquire title or color of title before the purchase request becomes a hostile negotiation.
Not having all the facts I would desire to have more facts before personal consideration of such an acquisition.
Paul in PA
You're too funny, spledeus! 😉
Does this involve adverse possession of a bedroom, TV room, kitchen and one parking space near the house?o.O
Ask yourself this question; "If it's such a great idea why does the attorney need me to invest?"
Cause he wants to hang you out there with him!
If I was your client and I saw this I would get a new lawyer and surveyor.
There was an attempt of an adverse claim over open, unenclosed woodland, but that has been disregarded.
It's a mess of an area. The parcel the lawyer wants to buy is adjoining both lots in the case. The common boundary for all three is ambiguous. I found a ring of stones at the north, there's an angle point calling for a tree in 1862, and the southerly point was disturbed within the past 10-years by development. We need 20 years in MA, so don't get your hopes up over more AP.
I have explained to the lawyer that my acquiring an interest in an adjacent parcel will either be a conflict or an apparent conflict. I don't want to deal with either. Perhaps Foggy wants to get into the Title Bounty Hunter business... He knows the attorney...
Tend to agree Larry. At a minimum disclose to the client the alleged "offers" from said attorney. If for no other reason than CYA, and do it in writing and CC the attorney. Let the client fire the attorney, but stay on board as the surveyor to finish the job.
It all stinks and I'd tend to either finish it ASAP, or accept the fact that I'm in bed with an attorney with a "seeming" interest. Likely it will go downhill from there.
Run Forrest Run
> If I was your client and I saw this I would get a new lawyer and surveyor.
Larry,
Read the "invisible ink" part of the OP before you pass judgment on spledus.
I do think that the attorney, if serious, should have to answer to the Bar about this. That's a serious breach of ethics.
>
> Read the "invisible ink" part of the OP before you pass judgment on spledus.
I had not seen that part of the original post. Thanks for mentioning it.
Ken
if nothing more, i figured this would make for an interesting discussion.
the attorney has been before the bar before... and fined by the ethics commission (that one was classic but for another day)
i have politeley declined
