On June 28th, the Sixth Circuit held that an attorney who provides traditional legal services, and nothing more, cannot be liable to disappointed investors alleging violations of state securities laws. Investors in oil and gas exploration companies alleged that the offering documents contained misrepresentations amounting to securities fraud and sought to hold the lawyer who drafted the documents liable as an agent of the issuer. The Sixth Circuit holds that the state statute, which is based on the Uniform Securities Act, does not impose liability on an attorney who performs traditional legal services for a company offering its securities for sale to the public. Bennett v. Durham.