Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

607 N.W.2d 429

In Re Panel File Number 99-5

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided March 2, 2000

Supreme Court of Minnesota · decided 2000-03-02

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently August 2019

5 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2000-03-02

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PAGE, Justice

¶1(concurring specially).

¶2I concur in the result reached by the court, but write separately to state that as I read Rule 1.2(a) of the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct, Minnesota attorneys have an absolute duty, unless they withdraw from the representation, to communicate to the opposing party all settlement offers as proposed by that attorney’s client. If the attorney believes that the settlement as proposed by the client is not in the client’s best interest, it is incumbent upon the attorney to discuss the implications and ramifications of the settlement with the client. If, after that discussion, the client still wants to settle the case as proposed, the rule requires the attorney to either carry out the client’s wishes or withdraw.5

¶3. Obviously the attorney has no obligation to carry out a client's wishes if those wishes involve illegal or unethical conduct.

/607/nw2d/429 · .json · Public domain