"they had hoped to announce that the court had decided that Dave's actions warranted the appointment of a new board member who was already in their pocket."
Since what they were doing was WRONG... that makes all of the elements in what they were doing that was wrong, a part of the wrong doing ?
So, the "shareholders meeting" itself was intended as a component element in a PLAN to commit a complex series of wrongful acts... with criminal intent... that included wrongs intended to be perpetrated in and through the court ?
Obviously, there had to be lawyers involved in that...
And, those lawyers committed malpractice ?
The shareholders meeting was intended to be a triumphant announcement that they'd executed a complex plan to break the law... and succeeded ?
Since the shareholders meeting was a component element in the plan to do wrong... participation in that effort... implicates the participants in the wrong doing ?
It appears to me that must include lawyer Storm ?
If that's right, then, I think he must have committed malpractice FIRST in what he said at the meeting, and THEN in what DID at the meeting, and AGAIN in the fact of what he did merely in participating...
JMHO