
Quoting
Mr B
Hello all,
I really appreciated the feedback that has been given.
The more I tried to research, the more I do think I have a malpractice claim could be made, which would make recovering everyone's money much easier (due to insurance).
Here is why I think a client - attorney relationship was established:
* It was represented to me, that upon sending money to the Lawyer's client trust account, I would become a member of the Co-Op. And as he is the Co-Op's lawyer, he needs to look out for the best interest of it's members.
* On the phone, he advised me that this was a good investment.
* As the lawyer of the Co-Op and only one with agency over the Co-Op, he was the attorney representing the money and investments in the Co-Op.
* After I sent the money, he was giving me advice / guidance on the Co-Op.
So, I think it can be argued, that a client - attorney relationship had been established (the representations of one, sending the money, and advising me). Or at the least, any reasonable person would have believed there was a client - attorney relationship, which could still make it legal malpractice? Or no?