28 / 52
Special Issue
l
THE NEWYLS
28
FEBRUARY/MARCH 2015
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.
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.
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