CLOAKED IN ATTORNEY IMMUNITY: THE LONE
STAR STATE'S LICENSE TO LIE? AARON K. BENDER AND ANDREW B. BENDER
I. PROLOGUE
...............................................
146
............ 148 ............................... II. INTRODUCTION III. BACKGROUND BEHIND THE ATTORNEY IMMUNITY DOCTRINE IN TEXAS
.....................................................
149
...... 149 ..................... A. Laying the Foundation B. HistoricalOrigins ofAttorney Immunity in Texas.................. 150 ..... 150 1. Poole v. Houston & T.C. Railway Company .... 151 ........ ................... 2. Kruegel v. Murphy 152 TEXAS.. IN IMMUNITY IV. FIRMLY ROOTED ISSUES WITH ATTORNEY Judgment A. Texas CourtsApply InconsistentSummary ............. 152 Standardsfor Attorney Immunity........ Stem Immunity Attorney B. The Inconsistencies Surrounding Its and v. West on Bradt from Texas Courts'Reliance ............. 154 ............................ Progeny 155 ................ 1. Bradt v. West.................. 157 Cracken.......................... Bell v. Taco 2. 159 ...... ......... Bell and Taco Bradt with Problems The C. 160 ............ ... DEVELOPMENTS IMMUNITY ATTORNEY RECENT V. 161 ............................... Galbraith. A. Gaia v. B. Cantey Hanger, LLP v. Lucy Leasing Company, LLC........... 165 VI.
PROPOSED SOLUTIONS TO THE ATTORNEY IMMUNITY DOCTRINE................................................
A. B. VII.
167 ...... 167 Cantey Hanger and Gaia Should be Revisited ..... Texas Courts Need to Implement a Simple Burden Shifting ............. 171 ............................ Analysis
CONCLUSION
.............................................
171
145