1. When an attorney representing a borrower
makes false and misleading representations of fact and
opinion in connection with a commercial loan application and that attorney is later sued for fraud, can the
district court, consistent with the standard set forth in
Rule 56(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
grant summary judgment in favor of that attorney despite evidence that the attorney knew the representations were false and misleading at the time they were
made?

2. Does an attorney's role as a zealous advocate
relieve the attorney from his or her ethical obligations
and responsibilities to be truthful and not conceal material facts?

When an attorney's false and misleading representations in a commercial loan application can lead to summary judgment in the attorney's favor despite evidence of knowledge of falsity