Fair

INTRODUCTION

“The relation between attorney and client is a fiduciary relation of the very highest character, and binds the attorney to most conscientious fidelity— *1141 uberrima fides.” (Cox v. Delmas (1893) 99 Cal. 104, 123 [ 33 P. 836 ]; accord, Oasis West Realty, LLC v. Goldman (2011) 51 Cal.4th 811, 821 .) Accordingly, “ ‘[a]ll dealings between an attorney and his client that are beneficial to the attorney will be closely scrutinized with the utmost strictness for any unfairness.’ [Citations.]” (Ritter v. State Bar (1985) 40 Cal.3d 595, 602 [ 221 Cal.Rptr. 134 , 709 P.2d 1303 ] (Ritter).) In Ritter, the court held that although the terms of the transaction entered into by the attorney and his clients were fair and reasonable, the attorney was subject to discipline for failing to provide his clients with a reasonable opportunity to discuss the transaction with independent counsel, as required by the predecessor to mle 3-300 of the California Rules of Professional Conduct. 1 In so doing, the court rejected the attorney’s claim that failure to comply with the rule was a mere “ ‘technical’ ” violation. (Ritter, at p. 602.) In this case, we consider whether an attorney…