Suppose you are negotiating a settlement in a physician malpractice case where your client is the injured party in which you are aware of information about the physician which came t

Suppose you are negotiating a settlement in a physician malpractice case where your client is the injured party in which you are aware of information about the physician which came to you through a source completely unrelated to the case.  The information involves the physician’s impending divorce, and his wife has apparently discovered some very serious “bookkeeping” irregularities in his business which suggest he has been robbing his partners for over 20 years.  Your client’s case against the physician is really fairly weak. 

1. From a purely business standpoint, do you think it is acceptable to tell your counterpart in the negotiation that you will use this information in every possible way to get the best deal for your client?  Why or why not.
2. From an ethical standpoint, do you think it is acceptable to tell your counterpart in the negotiation that you will use this information in every possible way to get the best deal for your client?  Why or why not.
3. From a Christian standpoint, do you think it is acceptable to tell your counterpart in the negotiation that you will use this information in every possible way to get the best deal for your client?  Why or why not.
4. Should your answer really change across answers 1, 2, and 3?  Why do we tend to think that use of power like that is often acceptable in a “business” situation, but maybe not ethically, and almost certainly not from the Christian standpoint?