CBA Record

Special Issue l THE NEWYLS

AFTER KARAVIDAS AND EDMONDS Are You Always a Lawyer? Illinois Supreme Court Says Maybe Not, But the Exception is Limited By Trisha M. Rich and Colin P. Smith

W HEN THE LAWYERS IN OUR firm’s legal profession prac- tice advise lawyers around the country about their ethical obligations, we generally advise them that they are “always a lawyer,” and that they should view their ethical obligations through that lens. By that, we mean they should assume that there simply are not any circumstances in which they can take their lawyer hats off and expect that their conduct will not have implications on their professional status.

In re Karavidas After his father’s death in 2000, Theo- dore George Karavidas was named as the executor of his father’s will and the suc- cessor trustee of his father’s trust. The will authorized independent administration of the estate, which allowed Karavidas to take actions on behalf of the estate without court approval. Further, the trust docu- ments required Karavidas to create and fund two separate trusts. Karavidas, along with his mother and his sister, were the sole

We still think that is good advice, but the Illinois Supreme Court might disagree. In a duo of recent cases, In re Karavidas, 2013 IL 115767, and In re Edmonds, 2014 IL 117696, the Supreme Court has arguably departed from its own prior precedents and clearly departed from the majority rule in the United States in holding that lawyers cannot be disciplined for misconduct that does not arise in an attorney-client relationship.

28 FEBRUARY/MARCH 2015