Editor's Picks

Alternative Proposed 2013 FEO 14: Representation of Parties to a Commercial Real Estate Loan Closing

Photo Courtesy of the North Carolina State Bar

 View proposed ethics opinion in full here

This alternative to 2013 Formal Ethics Opinion 14 would restrict a lawyer completely from representing both the lender and borrower in a commercial real estate closing.  This opinion takes the proposition that there are no instances in which common representation can be consented to in this type of transaction.  Citing again to Rule 1.7, the opinion explains that common representation in a commercial real estate closing involves a concurrent conflict of interest that is always nonconsentable.  This opinion does not differ with respect to the ruling on Bank’s Counsels.

This opinion was abandoned in favor of 2013 Formal Ethics Opinion 14 on January 23, 2015.

Ana Hopper, Editor-in-Chief Emeritus
About Ana Hopper, Editor-in-Chief Emeritus (33 Articles)
Ana Hopper is a 2016 Campbell Law graduate and served as the Editor-in-Chief of the Campbell Law Observer for the 2015-2016 academic year. She is originally from Winston-Salem and graduated from the University of North Carolina at Charlotte in 2012 with a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and Sociology. The summer following her first year of law school, Ana worked as a research assistant for Professor Amy Flanary-Smith. Ana also interned at the Criminal Appellate Section of the Department of Justice her second year, and at the New Hanover District Attorney's Office as an intern the summer before her third year. She served as a Legal Research and Writing Scholar, Vice President of BLSA, and Community Chair of Lambda during her time at Campbell.
Contact: Email