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. The Conour embarrassment is an example of why it would be a good idea to NOT name public buildings or to erect monuments to "worthy" people until AFTER they have been dead three years, at least. And we also need to stop naming federal buildings and roads after a worthless politician whose only achievement was getting elected multiple times (like a certain Congressman after whom we renamed the largest post office in the state). Also, why have we renamed BOTH the Center Township government center AND the new bus terminal/bum hangout after Julia Carson?

  2. Other than a complete lack of any verifiable and valid historical citations to back your wild context-free accusations, you also forget to allege "ate Native American children, ate slave children, ate their own children, and often did it all while using salad forks rather than dinner forks." (gasp)

  3. "So we broke with England for the right to "off" our preborn progeny at will, and allow the processing plant doing the dirty deeds (dirt cheap) to profit on the marketing of those "products of conception." I was completely maleducated on our nation's founding, it would seem. (But I know the ACLU is hard at work to remedy that, too.)" Well, you know, we're just following in the footsteps of our founders who raped women, raped slaves, raped children, maimed immigrants, sold children, stole property, broke promises, broke apart families, killed natives... You know, good God fearing down home Christian folk! :/

  4. Who gives a rats behind about all the fluffy ranking nonsense. What students having to pay off debt need to know is that all schools aren't created equal and students from many schools don't have a snowball's chance of getting a decent paying job straight out of law school. Their lowly ranked lawschool won't tell them that though. When schools start honestly (accurately) reporting *those numbers, things will get interesting real quick, and the looks on student's faces will be priceless!

  5. Whilst it may be true that Judges and Justices enjoy such freedom of time and effort, it certainly does not hold true for the average working person. To say that one must 1) take a day or a half day off work every 3 months, 2) gather a list of information including recent photographs, and 3) set up a time that is convenient for the local sheriff or other such office to complete the registry is more than a bit near-sighted. This may be procedural, and hence, in the near-sighted minds of the court, not 'punishment,' but it is in fact 'punishment.' The local sheriffs probably feel a little punished too by the overwork. Registries serve to punish the offender whilst simultaneously providing the public at large with a false sense of security. The false sense of security is dangerous to the public who may not exercise due diligence by thinking there are no offenders in their locale. In fact, the registry only informs them of those who have been convicted.

ADVERTISEMENT