ILNews

Attorneys discuss ethics of energy law practice

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Indiana Lawyer Focus

Ethical issues faced by attorneys practicing energy law are often the result of the small number of lawyers currently in that field of law.

Evansville lawyer Kathryn Schymik, of Jackson Kelly, says that many energy law practitioners in Indiana are on a first-name basis and it’s not uncommon for a case to come up where a potential conflict exists.

schymikSchymik

An Indiana Continuing Legal Education Forum conference on Feb. 22 focused on the expanding and changing area of energy law, with one session devoted specifically to ethical challenges. Linton attorney John Rowe and Schymik led the 30-minute open discussion, which included 26 Indiana attorneys attending either in person or via webcast.

One of the ethical challenges energy law practitioners brought up at the session involved conflicts of interest between parties they’re representing. In this area of law where mining or natural resources are tapped for energy, those owning the land and others producing or purchasing the end-product often rely on the same attorneys to handle their legal work.

Steve Link in Evansville said he often has clients who request his counsel on different stages of the same matter, such as an oil and gas operator that signs a land lease to drill wells and later the company that purchases the product from that land owner.

“We often see that there can be a question of who your duties are to at that point, and that’s something we all have to be mindful of,” Link said.

Schymik said she tries to be up front with clients about potential conflicts that could exist and let them know that, because of the small network of attorneys, they might have to be referred to other counsel.

For example, she said one of the challenges that she’s faced involves title work for one client on a lease or land transaction and then later having a purchaser or lender ask to rely on the same title opinion in order to draft a similar agreement. Essentially, Schymik said she must carefully examine what work-product and privilege issues exist.

Practitioners in this growing practice area say the changing nature of energy law and the regulatory environment present issues that could significantly alter their practices. This is particularly true when it comes to renewable energy issues surrounding wind, natural sustainability and climate change.

“We’re dealing with something akin to the Wild West from a legal perspective,” said Jeff Lorenzo of Lorenzo & Bevers in Seymour. “Much like the law related to the Internet, so many new issues have arisen in the past 15 years and we’re just beginning to sort through them.  But we can see a framework being constructed as we move forward. As the Legislature and courts respond to new environmental technologies, we’ll be confronted with issues we have no or very little regulation for. It will give attorneys a ground floor opportunity to contribute to the development of ethical responses to critical issues.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Wishing Mary Willis only God's best, and superhuman strength, as she attempts to right a ship that too often strays far off course. May she never suffer this personal affect, as some do who attempt to change a broken system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QojajMsd2nE

  2. Indiana's seatbelt law is not punishable as a crime. It is an infraction. Apparently some of our Circuit judges have deemed settled law inapplicable if it fails to fit their litmus test of political correctness. Extrapolating to redefine terms of behavior in a violation of immigration law to the entire body of criminal law leaves a smorgasbord of opportunity for judicial mischief.

  3. I wonder if $10 diversions for failure to wear seat belts are considered moral turpitude in federal immigration law like they are under Indiana law? Anyone know?

  4. What a fine article, thank you! I can testify firsthand and by detailed legal reports (at end of this note) as to the dire consequences of rejecting this truth from the fine article above: "The inclusion and expansion of this right [to jury] in Indiana’s Constitution is a clear reflection of our state’s intention to emphasize the importance of every Hoosier’s right to make their case in front of a jury of their peers." Over $20? Every Hoosier? Well then how about when your very vocation is on the line? How about instead of a jury of peers, one faces a bevy of political appointees, mini-czars, who care less about due process of the law than the real czars did? Instead of trial by jury, trial by ideological ordeal run by Orwellian agents? Well that is built into more than a few administrative law committees of the Ind S.Ct., and it is now being weaponized, as is revealed in articles posted at this ezine, to root out post moderns heresies like refusal to stand and pledge allegiance to all things politically correct. My career was burned at the stake for not so saluting, but I think I was just one of the early logs. Due, at least in part, to the removal of the jury from bar admission and bar discipline cases, many more fires will soon be lit. Perhaps one awaits you, dear heretic? Oh, at that Ind. article 12 plank about a remedy at law for every damage done ... ah, well, the founders evidently meant only for those damages done not by the government itself, rabid statists that they were. (Yes, that was sarcasm.) My written reports available here: Denied petition for cert (this time around): http://tinyurl.com/zdmawmw Denied petition for cert (from the 2009 denial and five year banishment): http://tinyurl.com/zcypybh Related, not written by me: Amicus brief: http://tinyurl.com/hvh7qgp

  5. Justice has finally been served. So glad that Dr. Ley can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing the truth has finally come to the surface.

ADVERTISEMENT