determinative question, then, is whether an attorney-client relationship ever arose between Wang and Foster. Nevertheless, because ethical rules are generally concerned with the behavior and regulation of the legal profession, and more specifically here with the protection of communications that a reasonable person would assume to be confidential, the various legal criteria employed to determine a client relationship under agency or other contractual employment theories do not necessarily provide the appropriate an the situation involving an initial interview (such as that occurring be tween Wang and Foster) where both parties understand that the relationship is potential, not implied or actual. See B.F. Goodrich Co. v. Formosa Plastics Corp., 638 F.Supp. 1050, 1052 (S.D.Texas 1986) (<HOLDING>). Even in such an initial interview both the
holding that there is no right to a meaningful attorneyclient relationship holding that attorneys should be disqualified where the substantial relationship test is met in order to assure that the confidentiality of the attorneyclient relationship and the loyalty between attorney and client are preserved holding allday interview insufficient to form attorneyclient relationship where potential client was in process of conducting several interviews holding that normal attorneyclient relationship does not bar rule 60b relief when the evidence is clear that the attorney and his client were not acting as one holding that attorneys notes of client interviews are not discoverable absent a showing of necessity or justification