In the Matter of James C. Wollrab

Summary

The court affirmed that Wollrab violated Rule 1.8(a) by entering into a lifetime lease giving him a possessory interest adverse to his clients without satisfying the rule's safeguards. It also affirmed that he violated Rule 1.8(a)(3) by entering into the option agreement without obtaining informed, written consent to its essential terms and his role. The court reversed the findings that he violated Rule 1.8(a)(1), Rule 1.8(a)(2), and Rule 4.2 concerning the option because the client's independent counsel implicitly consented to the transaction and communications, and remanded for reconsideration of the sanction.