pro res MC

Attorney A represented his Client C in a real estate transaction 3 years ago. All went well & C was satisfied with A's services. A has been approached by D, a prospective client, to represent him in a battery claim against C. If A agrees, will he be subject to discipline? A. Yes, unless C agrees in writing. B. Yes, because the conflict here cannot be waived. C. No, because the matters are unrelated. D. No, because A closed C's file 3 years ago and no longer has any duties to D.

C. No, because the matters are unrelated.

In preparing a DUI defense on behalf of her client, an attorney's investigator interviewed the bartender at a local pub. The bartender told the investigator about the client's drinking habits at the pub. The investigator subsequently reported the bartender's comments to the attorney. The bartender's comments are protected by . . . A. Both Rule 1.6 and attorney-client privilege. B. Attorney-client privilege only. C. Rule 1.6 only. D. Neither attorney-client privilege nor Rule 1.6.

C. Rule 1.6 only.

Attorney A is representing Wife in a child custody matter and just learned that Husband has retained A's Mother M to represent him against the Wife in that same matter. This scenario: A. Is permissible as long as A & M do not discuss their clients' secrets. B. Is acceptable and rather common. C. The mother-daughter relationship creates a significant risk that it may interfere with each attorney's loyalty to her client and thus requires informed consent of each client. D. Is prohibited because of personal conflict of interest so either A or M must withdraw from representation.

C. The mother-daughter relationship creates a significant risk that it may interfere with each attorney's loyalty to her client and thus requires informed consent of each client.

Attorney A is in-house counsel for ABC Company. ABC & its Vice-President ("VP") are accused of gender discrimination towards a group of their employees. Can Attorney A represent both ABC & VP in that lawsuit? A. No, because there is a conflict of interest between the 2 clients. B. No, unless both clients understand they have the same lawyer. C. Yes, as long as both clients provide consent in writing with the understanding that should a potential conflict arise, A would only continue representing ABC, while VP would need to find independent counsel. D. Yes, because it is the same lawsuit arising out of company business & VP's employment.

C. Yes, as long as both clients provide consent in writing with the understanding that should a potential conflict arise, A would only continue representing ABC, while VP would need to find independent counsel.

Judge Judy appointed Attorney A to represent a criminal defendant in a larceny case, but A is trying to avoid that appointment. A will be able to avoid it if: A. The case itself does not really interest him. B. He has a very busy schedule and does not have time to work on this case. C. He just paid for an expensive trip overseas and feels he needs to save some cash for future trips, so he asked the judge to excuse him due to "unreasonable financial burden." D. A will not be able to avoid the appointment unless he can show "good cause."

D. A will not be able to avoid the appointment unless he can show "good cause."

The Smith, Harding & Jones law firm represented Client C. Attorneys A & B are associates at that firm and they worked on the case together & charged a joint hourly fee, which was divided between them with A getting a larger amount than B. All legal fees were agreed upon, but neither A nor B ever asked C to agree to their fee division in writing. Are A& B subject to discipline? A. Yes, because A & B failed to obtain a written agreement with C regarding their fee division. B. Yes, because fee division is not allowed under the Rules. C. No, as long as A & B they divided the fee in proportion of the work done. D. No, because A & B are in the same law firm.

D. No, because A & B are in the same law firm.

While representing his Client C on an attempted murder charge, Attorney A learned that C had removed evidence from the scene of the crime 2 days after the crime was committed. Should A tell the prosecution that C removed evidence? A. Yes, if that evidence is material to the case. B. Yes, if A believes that C is the one who committed the crime. C. No, because the evidence is prejudicial to his client. D. No, because A's knowledge was obtained during his representation of C.

D. No, because A's knowledge was obtained during his representation of C.

Under the Rules, attorneys are viewed as "competent" when . . . A. they have at least 5 years of experience in law practice B. they have previously worked in a certain area of law C. they are specialized and certified in a particular field of law D. the day they obtain their law license

D. the day they obtain their law license

Contingent fees in criminal cases. A client retained an attorney to represent him in two cases: a criminal case and a divorce case. The attorney required that the client pay a retainer fee for the family law case, which billed at the attorney's hourly rate. The attorney then arranged for the client to pay him based on a contingency fee for the criminal case. The attorney and the client both signed the combined contract, which detailed each fee arrangement for each case, and the attorney's representation began. Are the attorney's actions proper? a. No, as attorneys cannot charge a contingent fee for representing a defendant in a criminal case. b. No, because attorneys must have separate contracts for each separate case the attorney is handling for a client. c. Yes, because attorneys can charge hourly rates for domestic relations matters and can charge contingency, hourly, or flat fees for criminal cases. d. Yes, because attorneys are restricted from charging contingency fees only in domestic relations matters when the payment is contingent upon the securing of a divorce or upon the amount of alimony, support, or property settlement.

a. No, as attorneys cannot charge a contingent fee for representing a defendant in a criminal case.

Attorney A represents Client in a civil matter. Client's case went to trial and Client lost. Client wished to appeal the matter. A did not file an appeal because there was no agreement that he would handle the appeal. A was too busy to discuss this with Client. The period in which Client could file an appeal expired and no appeal was filed. Was A's conduct proper? a. No, because a lawyer must discuss the possibility of an appeal and how it should be handled before he relinquishes responsibility for a client's case, unless there was a prior agreement about whether the lawyer would handle the appeal process. b. No, because a lawyer shall complete an entire case for a client, including the appeal process c. Yes, because an attorney is not required to continue working on a case for a client after trial unless the attorney and the client specifically agreed that the attorney would continue to be employed as the attorney for the appeal process. d. Yes, because the same lawyer cannot represent a client at trial and on appeal, and the client should have been aware of this rule.

a. No, because a lawyer must discuss the possibility of an appeal and how it should be handled before he relinquishes responsibility for a client's case, unless there was a prior agreement about whether the lawyer would handle the appeal process.

An attorney worked at Big Firm for five years, and she specialized in real estate. During the last three years, the attorney has worked mostly on Conglomerate Corporation's properties and disputes that arose related to them. Shortly before leaving Big Firm, the attorney handled a matter for Conglomerate Corporation related to the construction of a new apartment complex. The attorney now works at Boutique Firm, and a prospective client explains during an initial consultation that she needs to sue Conglomerate Corporation over a disputed right of way through the very property that holds the new apartment complex—one of the last matters that she handled for Conglomerate. Conglomerate is still using Big Firm for its legal representation. Would it be proper for the attorney to represent the prospective client in this matter against Conglomerate Corporation? a. The attorney may represent the new prospective client if Conglomerate Corporation consents in writing to her doing so. b. The attorney may represent the new prospective client but only if all parties involved sign a waiver. c. The attorney may not ever represent the new prospective client against her former client unless her former client consents. d. The attorney may represent the new prospective client because she no longer works for Big Firm and no one in her new firm would have confidential information about Conglomerate Corporation

a. The attorney may represent the new prospective client if Conglomerate Corporation consents in writing to her doing so.

Former clients and new clients. An attorney worked at Big Firm for five years, and she specialized in real estate. During the last three years, the attorney has worked mostly on Conglomerate Corporation's properties and disputes that arose related to them. Shortly before leaving Big Firm, the attorney handled a matter for Conglomerate Corporation related to the construction of a new apartment complex. The attorney now works at Boutique Firm, and a prospective client explains during an initial consultation that she needs to sue Conglomerate Corporation over a disputed right of way through the very property that holds the new apartment complex—one of the last matters that she handled for Conglomerate. Conglomerate is still using Big Firm for its legal representation. Would it be proper for the attorney to represent the prospective client in this matter against Conglomerate Corporation? a. The attorney may represent the new prospective client if Conglomerate Corporation consents in writing to her doing so. b. The attorney may not represent the new prospective client in the same or substantially the same matter unless Conglomerate Corporation consents in writing. c. The attorney may not represent the new prospective client in the same or substantially the same matter unless the new prospective client consents in writing. d. The attorney may represent the new prospective client because she no longer works for Big Firm and no one in her new firm would have confidential information about Conglomerate Corporation.

a. The attorney may represent the new prospective client if Conglomerate Corporation consents in writing to her doing so.

A mutually beneficial arrangement. An attorney made an informal agreement with a physician that they would refer clients to each other when the situation seemed appropriate. They did not pay each other any money for referrals, but the relationship was explicitly reciprocal—the attorney referred patients who needed medical examinations to the physician, and when the physician had patients needing legal representation, he referred them to the attorney. The relationship was not explicitly exclusive—each was free to refer clients to others—but it happened that neither had similar reciprocal relationships with anyone else. They always informed their clients when making such referrals that they had a reciprocal relationship. Is such an arrangement proper? a. Yes, a lawyer may agree to refer clients to another lawyer or a non-lawyer professional, in return for the undertaking of that person to refer clients or customers to the lawyer, as long as clients are aware and the relationship is not exclusive. b. Yes, because the agreement is informal, not a written contract. c. No, because a lawyer may not agree to refer clients to another lawyer or a non-lawyer professional, in return for the undertaking of that person to refer clients or customers to the lawyer. d. No, because the relationship described here is de facto exclusive, even if they have not agreed specifically to keep the relationship exclusive.

a. Yes, a lawyer may agree to refer clients to another lawyer or a non-lawyer professional, in return for the undertaking of that person to refer clients or customers to the lawyer, as long as clients are aware and the relationship is not exclusive.

A conflict of interest discovered during representation. An attorney agreed to represent a plaintiff in a personal injury lawsuit, and the next day agreed to represent a defendant in litigation where the defendant faces vicarious liability. Only after the attorney has conducted some investigation of the case, and has obtained confidential information from each client, does the attorney discover that the plaintiff client is actually suing another of the attorney's clients, under a theory of vicarious liability. The two clients are actually adverse parties in the same litigation. Must the attorney withdraw from representing both clients? a. Yes, a lawyer shall withdraw from the representation of a client if the representation will result in violation of the rules of professional conduct. b. Yes, the lawyer must withdraw unless both clients consent to the conflict of interest. c. No, the lawyer may withdraw, but withdrawal is optional and not mandatory. d. No, the lawyer may not withdraw once litigation is underway, regardless of the conflict of interest.

a. Yes, a lawyer shall withdraw from the representation of a client if the representation will result in violation of the rules of professional conduct.

Client of the lawyer who left. An attorney represented Small Business Associates while working at Big Firm, her first law firm after law school. When the attorney did not make partner at the firm, she ended her employment there and started her own new firm. The attorney took some of her clients with her, including Small Business Associates, whom she continues to represent. Big Firm no longer has Small Business Associates as a client. Big Firm then agrees to represent Conglomerate Corporation in a trademark infringement case against Small Business Associates, the first such case that the latter has ever faced. Can Big Firm represent Conglomerate in a case against its former client, Small Business Associates? a. Yes, as long as the matter is not the same or substantially related to that in which the attorney formerly represented the client; and no lawyer remaining in the firm has confidential information about Small Business Associates from when the attorney represented them at that firm. b. Yes, because otherwise the disqualification of the firm would constitute an agreement not to provide representation to specific clients in the future, which would violate the Rules of Professional Conduct. c. No, unless the attorney's new firm screens her from the litigation according to the procedures set forth in the Rules of Professional Conduct. d. No, unless Conglomerate provides written informed consent to the potential conflict of interest.

a. Yes, as long as the matter is not the same or substantially related to that in which the attorney formerly represented the client; and no lawyer remaining in the firm has confidential information about Small Business Associates from when the attorney represented them at that firm.

Attorney A likes to refer clients to Attorney B for estate planning. Their agreement is that A does so only in cases when A believes B can provide the best possible service for clients based on the complexity of cases and B's area of expertise. If A honestly believes B is not the right attorney for the matter & A has no time or ability to handle it himself, he then looks at other possible referrals, including reviewing the directory of the Houston Bar Association and the alumni book from his law school. However, when A does refer clients to B, B normally sends him a $600 gift certificate to A's favorite restaurant. In fact, A expects it because B has done it every time. Is A subject to discipline for this arrangement? a. Yes, because A should not receive anything of value for recommending another lawyer's services. b. No, because A does not specifically ask for payment. c. No, because B does not provide A with any specific dollar amount. d. No, as long as there is no written agreement re the same.

a. Yes, because A should not receive anything of value for recommending another lawyer's services.

Disinheriting the daughter. An attorney agreed to prepare a will for a client, a wealthy widow with three grown children. An earlier will divided her estate equally between her children, but the client now wants to modify the will to disinherit her only daughter, who disobeyed the client's wishes by marrying outside their nationality. The daughter is also a lawyer and is married to a lawyer, and the estate is substantial. The client's two sons are both working as manual laborers and they struggle financially. In the past, there had been some tension between the brothers and their sister, although the relationships seem to be cordial now. The attorney believes that disinheriting the daughter will ensure that the daughter and her husband will contest the will after the client's death and will rupture the tenuous relationship between the siblings. The client did not ask for the attorney's advice about disinheriting the daughter, she just insisted on it. The attorney initiated a debate about it, explaining that he believed it could be against the client's best interests and would cause unnecessary acrimony between her children. Was it proper for the attorney to initiate such advice when the client did not ask for it? a. Yes, because a lawyer may offer unsolicited advice to a client when doing so appears to be in the client's interest. b. Yes, because a lawyer has a duty to refer not only to law but also to other considerations such as moral factors that may be relevant to the client's situation. c. No, because a lawyer is not expected to give advice until asked by the client, and should normally wait until asked for such advice, especially when the advice is not strictly a statement of the law on a subject. d. No, because a testator has a sacred right to devise her estate as she wishes.

a. Yes, because a lawyer may offer unsolicited advice to a client when doing so appears to be in the client's interest.

Don't lecture me. An attorney represents a client, who lost his criminal appeals and is now serving a life sentence in a federal penitentiary. The client confesses to the attorney that he (the client) committed a murder for which a jury incorrectly convicted another (innocent) man. The client says he is happy that someone else took the fall for that crime and that he will never tell anyone. The attorney lectures the client about the morality of this situation, allowing an innocent man to face life imprisonment or even capital punishment for a crime that the client committed, and pleads with the client to reveal the truth. Was it proper for the attorney to bring morality into his consultation with the client, and to sermonize on this point for a few moments? a. Yes, because in rendering advice, a lawyer may refer not only to law but to other considerations such as moral factors. b. Yes, because the attorney will have an obligation under the Model Rules to disclose the information if the client does not reveal the truth. c. No, because in rendering advice, a lawyer may refer only to legal and financial considerations, and not to personal views about morals or politics. d. No, because urging the client to reveal information that could overturn a final jury verdict undermines the finality of court decisions and the public's confidence in the legal system.

a. Yes, because in rendering advice, a lawyer may refer not only to law but to other considerations such as moral factors.

Attorney A knew about Attorney B's involvement in an illegal money laundering enterprise, although the money laundering was unrelated to B's law practice or representation of clients. A and B are partners in different law firms. Eventually, when federal law enforcement officials brought criminal charges against B, A's awareness of the situation became evident. Could A, who knew of the wrongdoing and ignored it, be subject to discipline? a. Yes, because it is a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct to fail to report serious fraud or criminal activity by another lawyer. b. Yes, because A who knew and did nothing was an accomplice after the fact. c. No, because A had no duty to report misconduct of lawyers in other firms. d. No, because A could have put himself in danger by reporting an organized crime effort, and lawyers do not have to report misconduct when doing so might expose the reporting lawyer to retaliation from criminal organizations.

a. Yes, because it is a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct to fail to report serious fraud or criminal activity by another lawyer.

Money laundering. An attorney knew about another lawyer's involvement in an illegal money laundering enterprise, although the money laundering was unrelated to the other lawyer's law practice or representation of clients. Eventually, when federal law enforcement officials bring criminal charges against the other lawyer, who is part of another firm, the first attorney's awareness of the situation becomes evident. Could the attorney who knew of the wrongdoing and ignored it be subject to discipline? a. Yes, because it is a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct to fail to report serious fraud or criminal activity by another lawyer. b. Yes, because the lawyer who knew and did nothing was an accomplice after the fact. c. No, because the attorney had no duty to report misconduct of lawyers in other firms. d. No, because the attorney could have put himself in danger by reporting an organized crime effort, and lawyers do not have to report misconduct when doing so might expose the reporting lawyer to retaliation criminal organizations.

a. Yes, because it is a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct to fail to report serious fraud or criminal activity by another lawyer.

The shareholder. An attorney is a partner in a law firm, and owns $100,000 worth of stock in Conglomerate Corporation, the named defendant in a new antitrust suit. The attorney's total compensation from the firm is around $15 million per year, including bonuses, and his net worth is around $500 million. His home is worth about $7 million and the attorney inherited it, so the property is unencumbered by any mortgage or liens. The attorney works in a specialized area of law at the firm and does not have much interaction with the other lawyers, except at parties and occasional partners' meetings. Another lawyer in the firm seeks to represent the plaintiffs in the antitrust action against Conglomerate Corporation, which is not a client of the firm. Would it be proper for the firm to represent the plaintiffs in litigation against Conglomerate Corporation? a. Yes, so long as the attorney is not involved in the representation, there will be no imputation of the attorney's conflict of interest to the other lawyers in the firm, because it is the attorney's personal interest and does not present a significant risk of materially limiting the representation of the client by the remaining lawyers in the firm. b. Yes, so long as the plaintiffs provide written informed consent to the potential conflict of interest, and the firm carefully screens the other lawyer representing them from the rest of the firm. c. No, because the personal interest of the firm's managing partner in Conglomerate is so great, relative to his earnings and assets, that there is a significant risk of materially limiting the representation of the plaintiffs in their cause of action against Conglomerate. d. No, because it is a nonconsentable conflict of interest for the firm to represent both adverse parties in litigation

a. Yes, so long as the attorney is not involved in the representation, there will be no imputation of the attorney's conflict of interest to the other lawyers in the firm, because it is the attorney's personal interest and does not present a significant risk of materially limiting the representation of the client by the remaining lawyers in the firm.

Having confidential information. An attorney worked for several years for a federal government agency in regulatory enforcement. Big Firm then hired the attorney for a much higher salary, and the attorney accepted the position and left her government position. One of the attorney's first assigned cases at Big Firm was a new action by the client against Conglomerate Corporation. The attorney had worked on an enforcement against Conglomerate Corporation and learned confidential government information about the entity during the litigation. The government agency gives its informed consent, confirmed in writing, to the representation. Is the attorney nevertheless subject to disqualification in the client's matter against the attorney's former employer? a. Yes, the attorney has confidential government information about a person acquired while working for the government agency, and therefore may not represent a private client whose interests are adverse to that person in a matter in which the information could be used to the material disadvantage of that person. b. No, because the attorney did not previously represent the client or Conglomerate Corporation, so there is no attorney-client privilege or conflict of loyalties here between two clients that the attorney is representing or has represented. c. No, because the appropriate government agency gave its informed consent, confirmed in writing, to the representation. d. No, as long as Big Firm has policies and procedures in effect to supervise the attorney's work closely enough to ensure compliance with the Rules of Professional Conduct, including training sessions about the conflict-of-interest rules.

a. Yes, the attorney has confidential government information about a person acquired while working for the government agency, and therefore may not represent a private client whose interests are adverse to that person in a matter in which the information could be used to the material disadvantage of that person.

Court administrator. An attorney was a judge for several years. Near the end of her tenure as a judge, she functioned in the role of the chief administrative judge in that court, assigning cases to the other judges and supervising their work, and had only a limited docket of her own trials. The attorney then left the bench and opened her own law practice. The attorney agrees to represent the client in a matter in the same courthouse where the attorney formerly served as a judge. The attorney even remembers the case, but only the names of the parties and the nature of the action, because she assigned it to the trial judge who currently has the case on his docket, but the attorney had no other involvement in the matter. The client's previous lawyer in the matter was subject to disqualification at the motion of the opposing party due to a conflict of interest. Is it proper for the attorney to represent the client in this matter? a. Yes, the fact that a former judge exercised administrative responsibility in a court does not prevent the former judge from acting as a lawyer in a matter where the judge had previously exercised remote or incidental administrative responsibility that did not affect the merits. b. Yes, as long as all the parties to the matter provide informed consent, confirmed in writing, to the representation. c. No, because she previously supervised the trial judge hearing the case, and even assigned the case to that judge. d. No, because the client's previous lawyer was already subject to disqualification due to a conflict of interest in the matter.

a. Yes, the fact that a former judge exercised administrative responsibility in a court does not prevent the former judge from acting as a lawyer in a matter where the judge had previously exercised remote or incidental administrative responsibility that did not affect the merits.

An attorney gets a favorable settlement in a divorce hearing and posts on social media, "After months of dealing with his hateful estranged wife, my client won enough money to treat his cancer!" Assuming the client knows nothing about the social media post, which of the following is true? a. The attorney is not subject to discipline because the court's finding is likely public information. b. The attorney is subject to discipline under MRPC 1.6. c. The attorney is subject to discipline only if the information posted on the attorney's social media is open to the public. d. The attorney is not subject to discipline if the information is true.

b. The attorney is subject to discipline under MRPC 1.6.

You're fired! A client hired an attorney to represent her in a litigation matter. At the end of the first day of trial, the client is unhappy with her lawyer's performance in the courtroom and informs the attorney that she is firing him and will find another lawyer. The attorney wants to continue representing this client until the end of the trial. May the client discharge the attorney after a trial has begun? a. Yes, as long as a client obtains permission from the court to discharge an attorney, it is permissible. b. Yes, a client has a right to discharge a lawyer at any time, with or without cause, subject to liability for payment for the lawyer's services. c. No, a client may not discharge a lawyer once a trial is underway, because the disruption could be prejudicial to the opposing party. d. No, a client cannot discharge a lawyer once the lawyer has received confidential information about the client's case.

b. Yes, a client has a right to discharge a lawyer at any time, with or without cause, subject to liability for payment for the lawyer's services.

A client who was a defendant in a high-profile murder case hired Attorney A to represent him. The client was unable to pay the attorney's fee, but he offered Attorney A the full media and literary rights to his story of the events and the trial, in exchange for representation. Attorney A agreed but included a provision in the retainer agreement stating that the attorney would not use any media or literary rights until the conclusion of the representation. The case proceeded to trial and eventually resulted in an acquittal for the client. Would Attorney A be subject to discipline for violating the conflict-of-interest rules? a. Yes, attorneys shall not ever accept media and/or literary rights in exchange for services provided to a client. b. Yes, attorneys cannot make an agreement with a client giving the lawyer media and/or literary rights in exchange for representation before the conclusion of the case. c. No, attorneys may accept media and/or literary rights, as long as they do not use such rights until after the conclusion of the case. d. No, attorneys are authorized to accept media and/or literary rights in exchange for services and may immediately use such rights if they are given in exchange for representation.

b. Yes, attorneys cannot make an agreement with a client giving the lawyer media and/or literary rights in exchange for representation before the conclusion of the case.

Tie us over for the weekend. A client retains an attorney to handle a criminal matter. The client delivers a retainer check to the attorney on Friday afternoon. The retainer check will only cover the work the attorney anticipates he will begin and complete the following Monday. Because the following Monday is a banking holiday, if the attorney deposits the retainer check into his client trust account on Friday afternoon, he will not have access to the funds until Tuesday. The attorney deposits the retainer check into his business checking account and pays himself on Friday before the firm closes with those funds. Is the attorney subject to discipline? a. Yes, attorneys shall not accept amounts paid in advance for criminal matters. b. Yes, attorneys shall deposit amounts paid in advance into a client trust account and the attorney shall not withdraw the funds until fees are earned or expenses are incurred. c. No, if an attorney believes the funds will be earned within a short period, the attorney may deposit the amount he anticipates will be earned directly into his business account. d. No, when an event out of an attorney's control, such as a bank holiday, causes the funds to be unavailable when the attorney anticipates he will need to withdraw the funds, the attorney may deposit the amount he reasonably believes will be earned or needed for expenses into his business account instead of the client trust account.

b. Yes, attorneys shall deposit amounts paid in advance into a client trust account and the attorney shall not withdraw the funds until fees are earned or expenses are incurred.

A client retains an attorney to handle a criminal matter. The client delivers a retainer check to the attorney on Friday afternoon. The retainer check will only cover the work the attorney anticipates he will begin and complete the following Monday. Because the following Monday is a banking holiday, if the attorney deposits the retainer check into his client trust account on Friday afternoon, he will not have access to the funds until Tuesday. To avoid this, the attorney deposits the retainer check into his business checking account and pays himself on Friday. Is the attorney subject to discipline? a. Yes, attorneys shall not accept amounts paid in advance for criminal matters. b. Yes, attorneys shall deposit amounts paid in advance into a client trust account and the attorney shall not withdraw the funds until fees are earned, or expenses are incurred. c. No, if an attorney believes the funds will be earned within a short period, the attorney may deposit the amount he anticipates will be earned directly into his business account. d. No, when an event out of an attorney's control, such as a bank holiday, causes the funds to be unavailable when the attorney anticipates he will need to withdraw the funds, the attorney may deposit the amount he reasonably believes will be earned or needed for expenses into his business account instead of the client trust account.

b. Yes, attorneys shall deposit amounts paid in advance into a client trust account and the attorney shall not withdraw the funds until fees are earned, or expenses are incurred.

The nonpaying client. A client, who happened to be a judge, hired an attorney to represent her in her divorce proceeding against her husband, who is guilty of marital infidelity. Their fee agreement stipulates that the attorney would bill the client every month for the work performed in the previous thirty days. After two months of representation, the attorney has sent the client two bills, and has received no payments. Is it proper for the attorney to seek to withdraw from the case based on unpaid fees? a. Yes, because otherwise the attorney will develop a conflict of interest with his own client, as the share of the marital assets will impact the client's ability to pay all the outstanding fees at the end of the proceeding. b. Yes, because a lawyer may withdraw if the client fails substantially to fulfill an obligation to the lawyer regarding the lawyer's services and has been given reasonable warning that the lawyer will withdraw unless the obligation is fulfilled. c. No, because a lawyer representing a judge may not withdraw without the judge's approval or permission. d. No, because withdrawing over unpaid fees turns the representation into a contingent fee arrangement, which is impermissible in a divorce case.

b. Yes, because a lawyer may withdraw if the client fails substantially to fulfill an obligation to the lawyer regarding the lawyer's services and has been given reasonable warning that the lawyer will withdraw unless the obligation is fulfilled.

Enforcing child support orders. A court orders that a certain client should receive child support from her ex-husband. The client's ex-husband stopped making child support payments twelve months ago. The client hires an attorney to handle the enforcement of child support against the client's ex-husband. The attorney agrees to take the case on a contingency basis because the client cannot afford to hire an attorney since she has not been receiving child support from her ex-husband. The client also asks the attorney to pay her court costs, as she cannot afford those either. The attorney prepares a contract that states the attorney will only be paid for his representation if the client prevails on the enforcement motion, but that court costs will be reimbursed by the client within thirty days of the finalization of the case regardless of whether the client prevails. Is the attorney's conduct proper? a. Yes, because attorneys may represent clients, regardless of the type of case, on a contingency basis, as long as clients are required to reimburse the attorney for the actual expenses paid by the attorney for the client. b. Yes, because attorneys may accept cases on a contingency basis in domestic relations issues if the case is merely to enforce a prior order, and attorneys may pay for court costs for clients. c. No, because attorneys cannot advance funds to clients for any expenses, whether or not those expenses are related to the case. d. No, because contingency fees are impermissible in any case involving domestic relations, including enforcement of prior orders.

b. Yes, because attorneys may accept cases on a contingency basis in domestic relations issues if the case is merely to enforce a prior order, and attorneys may pay for court costs for clients.

A clean start in another state. An attorney obtained admission to the bar in New York and practiced there for two years. She worked for Big Firm, which has offices in five states and a few locations overseas. After her two years in the New York office, the firm transferred her to its office in San Diego, California. The attorney then applied for admission to the California bar under a reciprocity arrangement, and the state bar admitted her without making her re-take the bar exam. After practicing in California for three years, somehow the New York state bar learned that the attorney had made false statements on her original bar application about misdemeanor arrests during college. The New York bar informed the California state disciplinary authority about this problem, and the California state bar commenced disciplinary proceedings against the attorney in California. Can the attorney be subject to discipline in California for false statements made on a bar application in another state? a. Yes, because the states depend on each other to help enforce their own attorney disciplinary rules, and California therefore has a legal duty to enforce disciplinary rules from New York. b. Yes, because if a person makes a material false statement in connection with an application for admission, it may be relevant in a subsequent admission application or disciplinary proceeding elsewhere. c. No, because the alleged misconduct occurred on a bar application in a non-contiguous state, so California has no jurisdiction over the matter. d. No, because the fact that the attorney has now practiced for five years means that the estoppel doctrine prevents a state bar from revisiting her original bar application.

b. Yes, because if a person makes a material false statement in connection with an application for admission, it may be relevant in a subsequent admission application or disciplinary proceeding elsewhere.

Attorney A is widely regarded as an exceptionally competent practitioner in the field of criminal law. His Client C became the subject of a grand jury investigation in a matter that could result in a felony indictment. C lacked sufficient funds to pay for A's services beyond the grand jury stage. He asked the attorney to provide limited representation for a flat fee. Under the arrangement he proposed, A would advise the client concerning the grand jury investigation, but the representation would end when an indictment was returned or the grand jury decided not to indict. A fully advised C of the practical and legal aspects of such proposal and C agreed. Is it proper for A to accept this limited representation? a. Yes, because the client and not the attorney suggested this arrangement. b. Yes, because the attorney and the client may agree to limit the scope of the representation so long as the limitation is reasonable under the circumstances. c. No, because the attorney should not limit the scope of the representation based on the client's ability to pay. d. No, because the scope of the representation may not be limited in a criminal case.

b. Yes, because the attorney and the client may agree to limit the scope of the representation so long as the limitation is reasonable under the circumstances.

Supporting the cause. An attorney is active within a new political movement and she has represented several members of the movement, who faced arrest or criminal charges for protesting and picketing. The attorney learns that police have arrested one of the prominent leaders of the movement for trespassing on private property during a protest, but that the movement leader is already out on bail. In response, the attorney calls the leader and offers to represent him in his case free of charge, explaining that she has experience representing other members of the movement in similar cases. The leader agrees to have the attorney represent him on a pro bono basis. The attorney wants to represent the leader because she admires him, but also because she believes it will generate terrific publicity for the firm's practice. Was it proper for the attorney to make this telephone solicitation? a. Yes, because the attorney believes in the leader's cause and is an active member of the movement. b. Yes, because the attorney did not charge for providing these legal services. c. No, because the attorney made a live telephone solicitation of a prospective client. d. No, because the attorney hopes to receive indirect benefit from the publicity that the representation will bring.

b. Yes, because the attorney did not charge for providing these legal services.

The third wife. An attorney represented a man twenty years ago in a divorce with the client's first wife. The client was a well-known local celebrity, a retired professional athlete who became a semi-successful actor and an outspoken advocate of a radical political cause. Recently, former client's third wife approached the same attorney seeking representation in obtaining a divorce from the former client. There are no children from the marriage—their children from previous marriages are now adults—and the distribution of assets will follow the terms of a carefully drafted prenuptial agreement between the former client and his third wife. The former client (that is, the husband) long ago provided written informed consent for future conflicts of interest if the attorney represented another party with adverse interests. The attorney does not believe that any confidential information learned from representing the husband twenty years ago in his first divorce will be relevant to the pending third divorce. On the other hand, there is regular media coverage of the husband's trysts and on-and-off sexual relationships with various actresses and female socialites in the area, and marital infidelity could trigger certain exception clauses in the prenuptial agreement. Would it be proper for the attorney to use the information about husband's recent indiscretions in representing the third wife? a. Yes, if the husband's new lawyer provides written informed consent to the use of the information in the divorce proceeding. b. Yes, the fact that a lawyer has once served a client does not preclude the lawyer from using generally known information about that client when later representing another client. c. No, not if the attorney learned confidential information about the husband having a pattern of marital infidelity during his prior representation of Husband. d. No, the fact that there is a prenuptial agreement with exceptions triggered by marital infidelity should preclude the attorney from using such information.

b. Yes, the fact that a lawyer has once served a client does not preclude the lawyer from using generally known information about that client when later representing another client.

Under the Model Rules, a member of the Bar must report . . . a. another lawyer he suspects stole money from client. b. another lawyer he knows borrowed $10 from his client trust account and plans to put it back shortly. c. his client, who is an attorney, who told him that she lied in court to avoid sanctions. d. a judge he heard is taking bribes.

b. another lawyer he knows borrowed $10 from his client trust account and plans to put it back shortly.

Attorney A provided legal services for a poor widow who needed help drafting her will and selling her house. They agreed upon a slightly reduced fee than what A normally charges because he knew her nephew and just wanted to be nice. After completing the work, A learned that the widow declared bankruptcy and will be unable to pay his fee. A then decided to write the hours off as pro bono and submit them to the state where he is licensed to get recognition for pro bono service. Under the circumstances: a. A will receive recognition for his pro bono work because he did not get paid for the services. b. A will receive recognition for his pro bono work because his fees were reduced from the very beginning. c. A will not receive recognition for pro bono work because he initially expected to be paid. d. A will not receive recognition for pro bono work because he did not receive prior approval from his state's bar association

c. A will not receive recognition for pro bono work because he initially expected to be paid.

Former prosecutor. An attorney began her career as a prosecutor at the District Attorney's Office. During her tenure as a prosecutor, she brought charges against an individual suspected of sending ricin, a deadly toxin, in an envelope to a prominent politician, apparently in an unsuccessful attempt to assassinate the public official. The jury found the evidence too attenuated, and it acquitted the defendant. Shortly thereafter, another person, who was a member of a terrorist organization, confessed to sending the ricin and provided extensive evidence of his plot to kill the politician to make a political statement. The attorney resigned from the District Attorney's Office, partly out of humiliation over this case, and went into private practice. Eighteen months later, the accused individual decides to sue the government over wrongful arrest, slander, libel, and wrongful prosecution over the case in which he obtained an acquittal. The attorney feels that her superiors at the D.A.'s Office had pressured her to press charges in order to satisfy the public uproar over the ricin letters, despite having scanty evidence that the accused individual was actually guilty. The attorney offers to represent the accused individual in his lawsuit against the government, partly to make amends or atone for her role in what she now views as an abuse of government power and a great injustice. Would it be proper for the attorney to handle this case, given her good intentions? a. Yes, because the test for determining if an improper conflict of interest exists between former clients and a new client is the lawyer's subjective motivations in undertaking the new representation, and in this instance, the attorney is merely trying to make amends for her past mistakes. b. Yes, because the attorney has a duty to repudiate her previous wrongful actions, and her representation of the individual will send a strong message to other prosecutors, which in turn serves the public interest. c. No, a lawyer who has prosecuted an accused person could not properly represent the accused in a subsequent civil action against the government concerning the same transaction. d. No, because a prosecutor cannot ethically "switch sides" and start representing criminal defendants in public practice, regardless of whether the same individuals are involved as clients.

c. No, a lawyer who has prosecuted an accused person could not properly represent the accused in a subsequent civil action against the government concerning the same transaction.

Same claim, different sector. An attorney spent several years working for the state Office of the Attorney General in its environmental litigation division. While there, the attorney began a case against a scrap metal facility for burying toxic materials on its grounds. The attorney then left government service and went to work for Big Firm. There, the attorney began representing a group of neighboring landowners in a lawsuit against the same scrap metal facility over the same burying of toxic material, as it had polluted the groundwater and had migrated to adjacent properties underground. Is it proper for the attorney to represent these plaintiffs? a. Yes, so long as the new clients provide written informed consent. b. Yes, because the new clients' interests match those of the attorney's government employer, and there is no indication of adverse interests being present between them. c. No, a lawyer who has pursued a claim on behalf of the government may not pursue the same claim on behalf of a later private client after the lawyer has left government service, except when authorized to do so by the government agency. d. No, because the attorney is using the prestige of having worked in government service to attract new clients, which creates a conflict between the attorney's self-interest and the public interest represented by the government agency.

c. No, a lawyer who has pursued a claim on behalf of the government may not pursue the same claim on behalf of a later private client after the lawyer has left government service, except when authorized to do so by the government agency.

Don't worry. . . . A client repeatedly calls an attorney to discuss her pending divorce case. The client wants above-guideline child support, alimony, and a large percentage of the estate, even though the parties have only been married two years. The attorney has continuously given his honest opinion about what he believes the client is eligible to receive, and what he believes she may receive in the divorce based on his experience. The client has recently become angry with the attorney because she is unhappy with his opinion. She has even asked, "Are you working for me or my husband?" In an effort to keep the client happy, the attorney begins to tell the client what he believes she is eligible to receive when she asks, but simply states "the court will decide" when the client asks the attorney what he believes she will receive. Are the attorney's actions proper? a. Yes, the attorney may respond to a client's requests for the attorney's opinion in any manner that will maintain the client's morale, including refusing to give advice if the attorney believes the client will not be accepting of his advice. b. Yes, attorneys are not required to give their opinions or advice, but may, at any time, respond to clients by referring them to the appropriate legal authority or by advising them that the court will ultimately decide the issue, if applicable. c. No, an attorney should give his honest opinion about the case when asked, even if the opinion is unsatisfactory to the client. d. No, attorneys should always give advice to clients that encourages the client to have confidence in the client's position.

c. No, an attorney should give his honest opinion about the case when asked, even if the opinion is unsatisfactory to the client.

The former mediator. An attorney, who often serves as a court-appointed mediator, was appointed to mediate the divorce case between a husband and wife. The case settled in mediation and the divorce was finalized soon after. A year later, the husband sought to retain the attorney to represent him in a modification suit against his wife. The attorney accepted the case and sent a letter to the wife advising her that the attorney had been retained by the former husband to represent him in a modification suit. Are the attorney's actions proper? a. Yes, the attorney who previously served as a third-party neutral may represent any party in a suit connected to the previous matter if the attorney provides proper notice to the other party in writing. b. Yes, an attorney who previously served as a third-party neutral may represent any party in a suit connected to the previous matter if the previous case occurred more than one year before the third-party neutral began representation of one of the parties. c. No, an attorney who previously served as a third-party neutral is required to obtain informed consent, confirmed in writing, from all parties to the proceeding prior to representing a party in a suit connected to the previous matter. d. No, an attorney who previously served as a third-party neutral shall not represent any party in a suit connected to the previous matter.

c. No, an attorney who previously served as a third-party neutral is required to obtain informed consent, confirmed in writing, from all parties to the proceeding prior to representing a party in a suit connected to the previous matter.

An attorney is dating a woman whose sister works as a nurse in a hospital emergency room. The attorney gives the nurse, his girlfriend's sister, a stack of his business cards and law firm brochures and offers to pay her $100 for any clients who hire him because of her referrals, with the understanding that she will not refer patients to any other lawyers. The nurse recommends several patients per month to the attorney for representation in personal injury claims, and one or two per month actually hire the attorney to represent them. All these clients end up satisfied with attorney's services as he does a thorough job. In fact, many end up thanking the nurse for the referral. Is such an arrangement proper? a. Yes, because the nurse is closely related to the attorney, given that the attorney is dating her sister. b. Yes, because the attorney is not paying the nurse on a contingent fee basis. c. No, because a lawyer shall not give anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer's services, with certain exceptions not applicable here.* d. No, because the fact that the attorney is dating the nurse's sister creates a conflict of interest if she refers clients to the attorney.

c. No, because a lawyer shall not give anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer's services, with certain exceptions not applicable here.*

The hearing officer. An attorney was a state hearing officer for the Workers Compensation Board. The attorney left that position and opened his own law firm, primarily representing parties before the state Workers Compensation Board. One of the cases is the final rehearing of a case in which the attorney had presided as hearing officer at an initial preliminary hearing and ruled on preliminary matters, but the attorney left the Board without issuing any final decision in the case and the Board transferred the matter to another hearing officer. The attorney represents the injured worker, the client. All the parties involved give informed consent, confirmed in writing, for the attorney to represent the client. Is the attorney subject to discipline for representing the client in this matter? a. Yes, because a lawyer shall not represent anyone in connection with a matter in which the lawyer participated personally in a substantial way as a judge or other adjudicative officer. b. Yes, because the type of conflict of interest described here is nonconsentable, so it is irrelevant that all the parties provided informed written consent. c. No, because all the parties involved provided informed written consent to the representation, despite the obvious conflicts of interest at stake. d. No, the conflict-of-interest rules do not apply to merely administrative hearing officers who are not actual judges, arbitrators, or mediators.

c. No, because all the parties involved provided informed written consent to the representation, despite the obvious conflicts of interest at stake.

Just a hunch. An attorney suspects that another lawyer in his firm has violated the Rules of Professional Conduct in a rather serious matter, but has no first-hand knowledge of the situation—his suspicion rests on the fact that the other lawyer seems to be acting paranoid and evasive, and a number of strange coincidences have occurred in his cases. Does the attorney who suspects something seriously wrong is afoot have a duty to report the other lawyer to the state bar disciplinary authority? a. Yes, but he must make an anonymous complaint to the state bar. b. Yes, because a lawyer who knows of a violation of the rules that raises serious questions about the other attorney's honesty must report it to the state disciplinary authority. c. No, because he does not have actual knowledge of the violation. d. No, because lawyers do not have to report violations by other attorneys at their own firm, which would create internal divisions and mistrust between partners.

c. No, because he does not have actual knowledge of the violation.

Attorney A, in-house counsel for ABC Company, found out that the company's Vice-President VP, has defrauded the company and A reasonably believes will continue to do so thereby causing a substantial injury to the company and its shareholders. A reported what happened to ABC Company President P, who seemed to cover for VP and did nothing about the allegations for 3 months. Accordingly, A decided to report fraud to authorities in order to protect ABC from future harm. Is A subject to discipline? A. Yes, because A did not protect his client's confidentiality. b. Yes, because VP is a part of "control group" in the company and A should have at least tried to warn VP before he reported him. c. No, because he learned about a clear violation of the law and P failed to do anything about it. d. No, because A only represents P, not VP.

c. No, because he learned about a clear violation of the law and P failed to do anything about it.

Former agency lawyer. An attorney worked for several years for a federal government agency in regulatory enforcement. Big Firm then hired the attorney for a substantially higher salary, and the attorney accepted the position and left her government position. One of the attorney's first assigned cases at Big Firm was a new action by the client against the same government agency for which the attorney had previously worked, challenging the constitutionality of a new regulation that the agency had recently promulgated. While at the agency, the attorney had not been involved with the review and promulgation of any new regulations, including the one at issue in the client's challenge, but instead worked exclusively on enforcement litigation matters. Is the attorney subject to disqualification in the client's matter against the attorney's former employer? a. Yes, because Big Firm gave the attorney an unreasonably large salary increase for leaving her public service position and joining Big Firm in the private sector, which creates a conflict of interest. b. Yes, unless the federal government agency is willing to provide written informed consent to the attorney's representation in the case. c. No, because the attorney did not participate personally and substantially in the matter as a public officer or employee. d. No, because the case involves a constitutional challenge to the validity of a regulation, not the financial interests of the client or government as would be recognized if the case involved fines, fees, or penalties.

c. No, because the attorney did not participate personally and substantially in the matter as a public officer or employee.

It is all out in the open now. An attorney worked for several years for a federal government agency in regulatory enforcement. Big Firm then hired the attorney for a much higher salary, and the attorney accepted the position and left her government position. One of the attorney's first assigned cases at Big Firm was a new action by the client against Conglomerate Corporation. The attorney had worked on an enforcement against Conglomerate Corporation and learned confidential government information about the entity during the litigation, but the attorney does not know, and has no reason to know, that the information is confidential government information. The attorney is under the reasonable impression that all the information she learned about Conglomerate Corporation is now public information. The government agency gave its informed consent, confirmed in writing, to the representation. Is the attorney nevertheless subject to disqualification in the client's matter against the attorney's former employer? a. Yes, the attorney has confidential government information about a person acquired while working for the government agency, and therefore may not represent a private client whose interests are adverse to that person in a matter in which the information could be used to the material disadvantage of that person. b. No, because the appropriate government agency gave its informed consent, confirmed in writing, to the representation. c. No, because the attorney does not have confidential government information about Conglomerate that she knows is confidential government information. d. Yes, because the attorney did not previously represent the client or Conglomerate Corporation, so there is no attorney-client privilege or conflict of loyalties here between two clients that the attorney is representing or has represented.

c. No, because the attorney does not have confidential government information about Conglomerate that she knows is confidential government information.

Whether to appeal. An attorney represented a client in tort litigation against a pharmaceutical company over injuries allegedly resulting from one of the company's drugs. During a pretrial hearing about the admissibility of certain evidence, the court ruled against the attorney and ordered that the evidence was inadmissible at trial. The attorney then contacted a reporter from a prominent newspaper and gave him a lengthy interview explaining the case, discussing the upcoming trial, and giving the reporter the very evidence that the court had held should be inadmissible at the trial. The newspaper ran the story on the same day that jury selection began for the trial. Opposing counsel moved to disqualify the attorney due to misconduct in the matter, that is, the public disclosure of the inadmissible material in an attempt to taint the jury pool. The court agreed to disqualify the attorney on the eve of the trial. Another firm was already representing the client as co-counsel, so that firm agreed to continue with the trial work alone. The attorney filed an interlocutory appeal, which he lost at the appellate court and appealed to the Supreme Court. Delaying the trial with this interlocutory appeal was clearly against the client's interest, but it was necessary for the attorney to continue to handle this big case. Is it proper for the attorney to recommend to the client that they appeal his disqualification, if it is not clearly in the client's interest to do so? a. Yes, because the lawyer's interests and the client's interests presumptively align in litigation. b. Yes, because the other lawyer might not obtain as favorable a result for the client as the attorney would. c. No, because the decision to appeal should turn entirely on the client's interest. d. No, because the disqualification was for lawyer misconduct rather than a conflict of interest.

c. No, because the decision to appeal should turn entirely on the client's interest.

When representing a client on a charge of burglary, a lawyer learns that his client had removed evidence from the scene of the crime. Should the lawyer tell the prosecutor that his client removed evidence? a. Yes because the evidence was probative. b. Yes, because it is critical information in this case. c. No, because the information was obtained through the attorney-client relationship. d. No, because the evidence was prejudicial.

c. No, because the information was obtained through the attorney-client relationship.

An attorney represents a company that produces chemical products. Some of the waste products of the company's manufacturing processes are highly toxic and are reasonably certain to cause substantial bodily harm if disposed of improperly. The president of the company recently informed the attorney that a new employee mistakenly disposed of the waste products in the ground behind the company plant, an area that is part of the source of the city's water supply. The attorney advised the president that, although the conduct was not criminal, the company could be civilly liable for negligence in lawsuits brought by any persons harmed by the waste products. The attorney also advised the president to immediately report the problem to city authorities. Fearful of adverse publicity, the president declined to do so. The attorney further advised the president that she believed the president's decision was immoral. The president continued to decline to report the matter. The attorney then informed the president that she was withdrawing from the representation and would inform the authorities herself. Immediately after withdrawing, the attorney reported the company's conduct to the authorities. Is the attorney subject to discipline? a. Yes, because the information was given to the attorney in confidence and may not be revealed without the client's consent. b. Yes, because the company's conduct was not criminal. c. No, if the attorney reasonably believed that the company's disposal of the waste products was reasonably certain to cause substantial bodily harm. d. No, because the attorney reasonably believed that the president was pursuing an imprudent course of conduct.

c. No, if the attorney reasonably believed that the company's disposal of the waste products was reasonably certain to cause substantial bodily harm.

The secretary's husband. A legal secretary in a law firm is married to the owner of an independent retail-clothing store. The firm undertakes representation of a clothing wholesaler, who is suing the same independent clothing store over nonpayment for shipments of merchandise. The legal secretary's husband hires another firm to represent his store in the lawsuit, and his lawyer asks the court to disqualify the legal secretary's firm because of her position there. Should the firm be subject to disqualification? a. Yes, because the conflict of interest is too great where the defendant's spouse works for opposing counsel's firm. b. Yes, because the lawsuit involves nonpayment for a shipment of merchandise, and the legal secretary indirectly benefited from her husband keeping these unpaid funds. c. No, if the firm screens the legal secretary from any involvement in the case or from access to any confidential information about the case. d. No, because the legal secretary is not a lawyer, so the Rules of Professional Conduct do not apply to her personal conflicts of interest.

c. No, if the firm screens the legal secretary from any involvement in the case or from access to any confidential information about the case.

The abortion clinic. An attorney works for a firm. She also describes herself as an outspoken advocate for the rights of unborn children, that is, she passionately favors legal restrictions on abortion. A local abortion clinic asks the firm to represent it in litigation over recent zoning measures that would significantly limit its hours of operation and therefore the number of clients the clinic could accept. The firm agrees to the representation. The attorney firmly refuses to have any part in the representation, and though no formal screening measures are in place, everyone else in the firm avoids discussing the case with her or around her because they are afraid of receiving another lecture about the wrongfulness of abortion. Early in the litigation, the judge considers disqualifying the firm because it employs the attorney, who has a reputation in the community for her advocacy against legalized abortion. Neither the clinic nor the opposing party (the municipal zoning authority) provided written consent to a conflict of interest. Should the firm be subject to disqualification in this case? a. Yes, because the firm did not implement formal screening measures to ensure that the attorney receives no confidential information about the case and cannot influence the other lawyers working on the case. b. Yes, because the firm did not obtain informed written consent from both parties to the potential conflict of interest. c. No, the firm should not be disqualified where one lawyer in a firm could not effectively represent a given client because of strong political beliefs, but that lawyer will do no work on the case and the personal beliefs of the lawyer will not materially limit the representation by others in the firm. d. No, because preserving women's access to legalized abortion is such an important fundamental right that it would be improper to limit the abortion clinic's options for representation in the matter, and other firms may also have conflicts of interest that would preclude representation.

c. No, the firm should not be disqualified where one lawyer in a firm could not effectively represent a given client because of strong political beliefs, but that lawyer will do no work on the case and the personal beliefs of the lawyer will not materially limit the representation by others in the firm.

Going up the chain of command. An attorney is in-house counsel for a large international corporation and has daily contact with higher-level executives and managers. One day, a senior executive mentions casually to the attorney that he has offered lucrative stock options, worth millions of dollars, to a foreign government official who has agreed to give the firm an exclusive contract to provide certain goods and services to the foreign state. The executive seems to think this is normal and good for the company, but the attorney believes it constitutes bribery of foreign officials, which would violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, and could subject the company to enormous fines and penalties. The attorney explains her concerns to the executive, including her concern that he could face personal criminal charges in addition to bringing liability on the corporation, and she reminds him that she represents the corporation, not him personally. The executive is dismissive of her concerns, even though she approaches him several times about the matter. How must the attorney proceed? a. She should report the matter immediately, in writing, to the Department of Justice, and tell no one in the company that she has done so. b. She should keep her conversations with the executive confidential but try to document everything that she knows about the situation in case the Department of Justice brings an enforcement action. c. She should approach the executive's immediate corporate superior, advising those next up the chain of authority to stop the transaction and take appropriate actions against the executive involved. d. She should immediately notify the company's Board of Directors, advising them about the potential liability and threatening to report the activities to the Department of Justice if they take no action.

c. She should approach the executive's immediate corporate superior, advising those next up the chain of authority to stop the transaction and take appropriate actions against the executive involved.

In the licensure process, the burden of proof re applicant's good moral character is on: a. Members of the State Licensing Board b. Attorneys that serve as references c. Shifts to the applicant once an issue is raised with his application. d. State courts

c. Shifts to the applicant once an issue is raised with his application.

Attorney A agreed to participate in a local Bar Association event titled: "Get Free Advice from Our Lawyers" where she offered to give 5 hours of her time to answer legal questions from citizens. Under the circumstances: a. Attorney A formed an attorney-client relationship with each person she spoke with during those 5 hours and has to continue helping them in the future until each matter is resolved. b. Attorney had a duty to check for possible conflict of interest so she should have gotten every citizen's name and conducted a conflicts check prior to her participation in the Bar Association event. c. The relationship will only last for the time of their discussion at the event and will not continue afterwards. d. Such events should never take place due to a lack of possibility to provide a thorough legal advice.

c. The relationship will only last for the time of their discussion at the event and will not continue afterwards.

One for all and all for one. Three sisters sustained injuries in a car accident last year. Because they did not have enough money to get separate attorneys, they decided to consent to using the same attorney. Before trial, the opposing party made a settlement offer. One of the sisters had sustained severe injuries, but the other two had only superficial scrapes and bruises. Their attorney believed that the settlement offer was reasonable, and that it would be in the clients' best interest to accept it to avoid the costs of trial. Even so, the attorney expected the sister with the more serious injuries to be resistant to a settlement offer, because she might obtain a larger judgment if she presented her case in front of a jury. If the attorney obtains consent from the other two sisters to accept the defendant's settlement offer will he be subject to discipline if he accepts the offer without discussing it the third sister, who had the worst injuries? a. No, because when a client retains a lawyer, he or she authorizes the lawyer to accept or reject settlement offers on his or her behalf. b. Yes, because an attorney must inform each client about all the material terms of the settlement before accepting any settlement offer on behalf of multiple clients. c. Yes, because an attorney must inform and obtain written consent from each client about all the material terms of the settlement before accepting any settlement offer on behalf of multiple clients. d. No, because the three sisters consented to being represented by the attorney and he believed it was in their best interest as a whole.

c. Yes, because an attorney must inform and obtain written consent from each client about all the material terms of the settlement before accepting any settlement offer on behalf of multiple clients.

Written agreements not always required. An attorney has represented a client on various small matters in the past. The client now needs representation for a more substantial matter involving a business transaction. During a phone call, the attorney agrees to represent the client at a slightly higher hourly rate, given the complexity of the matter, and when they meet to discuss the transaction in more detail, the attorney double-checks with the client about the fee arrangement verbally, explaining it carefully and answering any questions the client may have. The attorney and the client never formalize the fee arrangement in writing, but the attorney does send printed bills to the client periodically. Eventually, the client starts to feel that the representation is costing too much, and objects to one of the bills. Was it permissible for the attorney to have an oral agreement over hourly fees, without putting the fee agreement into writing? a. Yes, because the matter is more complex than the previous work the attorney has done for the client. b. No, because fee arrangements must be in writing, to avoid disputes between lawyers and their clients later on. c. Yes, because even though it is always preferable to have fee agreements in writing, it is not required in this type of case. d. No, because the attorney should have reduced his hourly fee, rather than raising it, if the matter is more complex and will generate more hours of work for the lawyer.

c. Yes, because even though it is always preferable to have fee agreements in writing, it is not required in this type of case.

After it's over. An attorney agreed to represent a client as plaintiff in a patent infringement lawsuit. The attorney was part of a partnership that specialized in intellectual property law. The attorney prepared, and the client signed, a written fee agreement that specified the attorney would receive a tiered contingent fee in the case: 25 percent if the case settled before trial, 30 percent if they went to trial and won, and 35 percent if the case went up on appeal and they prevailed in the appellate stage. In addition, the agreement specified that the contingent fee would come from total award before court costs and other expenses, and that the client would be responsible for court costs and expenses out of his own pocket, either along the way as expenses arose during the proceedings, or from the client's share of the award after the attorney received his contingent fee. The attorney never revealed that his partnership agreement required him to share his part of the fees with three other partners in the firm, or that his fees would go toward a general firm operating budget from which the partnership paid the salaries of non-lawyer staff, such as paralegals and secretaries. The attorney obtained a favorable settlement before trial. He telephoned the client with the good news and explained that he would deduct his 25 percent contingent fee, as they had agreed, and would send the client the remainder of the settlement funds. At that time, there were no outstanding unpaid expenses or court costs. The client was glad to hear the news, and the attorney promptly sent the client a check for 75 percent of the total amount received from the other party. The attorney and the client had no other contact except to exchange holiday greeting cards. Were the attorney's actions improper? a. Yes, because the attorney failed to obtain written informed consent from the client to share fees with other lawyers in the firm, and because the attorney charged a tiered contingent fee in a patent litigation case. b. No, because contingent fees in patent litigation are proper as long as there is a written fee agreement at the beginning of the representation. c. Yes, because the attorney failed to provide the client with a written statement stating the outcome of the matter and showing the remittance to the client and the method of its determination. d. No, because the attorney properly followed the agreement with the client, and there were no outstanding court costs or unpaid expenses at the time of the settlement.

c. Yes, because the attorney failed to provide the client with a written statement stating the outcome of the matter and showing the remittance to the client and the method of its determination.

Screening at the firm. An attorney was a judge but has left that job and joined Big Firm. Another lawyer at Big Firm represents the client in a case on the docket at the same court where the attorney worked as a judge. In fact, as a judge, the attorney ruled on some of the pretrial motions in the case, mostly evidentiary motions. The firm has screening measures in place to screen the attorney from any participation in the matter. The attorney will receive no part of the fee from the matter, and timely notice went to the parties about the screening measures in place. The other parties, however, did not provide informed written consent to Big Firm's representation of the client. Is it proper for the other lawyer at Big Firm to continue representing the client in this matter? a. No, because a lawyer shall not represent anyone in connection with a matter in which the lawyer participated personally and substantially as a judge, and if a lawyer is disqualified, no lawyer in a firm with which that lawyer is associated may knowingly undertake or continue representation in the matter. b. No, because a lawyer shall not represent anyone in connection with a matter in which the lawyer participated personally and substantially as a judge, and the other parties did not provide informed consent, confirmed in writing, to the representation. c. Yes, so long as Big Firm also provides timely notice to the appropriate tribunal as well, so that the tribunal may ascertain compliance with screening measures. d. Yes, so long as the attorney is not receiving a salary or partnership share established by prior independent agreement.

c. Yes, so long as Big Firm also provides timely notice to the appropriate tribunal as well, so that the tribunal may ascertain compliance with screening measures.

Judge Judy, prior to her appointment to the probate court, was a partner in Law Firm. Law Firm had an extensive probate practice. At the time of Judge Judy's appointment, Law Firm had pending before the court to which Judge Judy was appointed numerous matters in which requests were being made for allowances for attorney's fees. When Judge Judy left Law Firm, she was paid a cash settlement. She has no further financial interest in any matter handled by Law Firm. Judge Judy is now being asked to rule on this request for allowances for attorney's fees. Is it proper for Judge Judy to rule on these requests? a. Yes, because Judge Judy has no financial interest in the outcome of these cases. b. Yes, if these requests are not contested. c. No, unless Judge notes on the record in each case her prior association with Law Firm. d. No, because Judge was associated with Law Firm when these matters were pending.

d. No, because Judge was associated with Law Firm when these matters were pending.

Risky business. A client hires an attorney to help with the legal documents necessary to liquidate most of his investments so that he can use the cash to fund a new business venture. The client explains that he plans to quit his regular job and start a new career working from home as a "day trader," buying and selling stocks online every day in hopes of making large profits. The client has no experience or training in finance or investments, but he attended a seminar that featured testimonials from others who claimed to have made millions as day traders. The attorney thinks this is a foolish idea, but the client does not ask the attorney for his advice. Does the attorney have an ethical duty to caution the client against his seemingly reckless decision? a. Yes, because a lawyer has a duty to offer sound advice and not wait for a client to ask questions to solicit the specific information. b. Yes, if the attorney suspects that the client will eventually have trouble paying his legal fees. c. No, because many day traders are indeed successful, and this client could be one of the fortunate ones. d. No, because a lawyer is not expected to give advice until asked by the client.

d. No, because a lawyer is not expected to give advice until asked by the client.

Withholding client documents. A client fired an attorney after the attorney had completed 80 percent of the work involved in the representation. The client refuses to pay any of the fees that were in the original agreement at the beginning of representation. The client also demands that the attorney turn over all papers and documents relating to the representation. Must the attorney immediately return the client's documents regardless of the fees owed? a. Yes, a lawyer must surrender all papers and property to the client as soon as representation ends, even if it ends with an untimely discharge of the lawyer. b. Yes, because the client has not received what she bargained for if she wants to discharge the lawyer before the representation is complete. c. No, because a client forfeits any right to papers and documents related to the representation if she discharges the lawyer without cause before the representation is complete. d. No, because a lawyer may retain papers relating to the client to the extent permitted by law.

d. No, because a lawyer may retain papers relating to the client to the extent permitted by law.

Attorney A created an email promoting his services and sent it via email blast to hundreds of different people in his town whose names he received from a telemarketer. He put his contact information at the bottom. Is A subject to discipline? a. Yes, because he contacted people without their permission. b. Yes, because he advertised via email. c. No, because his contact information was included. d. No, because his promotion method is appropriate.

d. No, because his promotion method is appropriate.

An attorney has been practicing for five years, but on her application to the bar five years earlier, she had stated that she had attended a particular private high school, when in fact she had attended a public high school. An unhappy client recently filed a grievance against the attorney, which was frivolous, but the state disciplinary authority had to conduct a routine, preliminary inquiry into the matter in order to make a determination that the complaint merited dismissal. The disciplinary board member assigned to the case had attended the elite private high school from which the attorney claimed to have graduated, and made a mental note of the attorney's high school when he did a cursory review of her bar admission files. He thought it was strange that he had never seen or heard her name at any alumni or reunion functions, as they had supposedly graduated the same year and the classes were small. On a hunch, the board member checked the alumni lists for the school and discovered that the attorney had lied on her application to the bar five years earlier. When asked about this issue, the attorney said she could not be subject to discipline now for the misstatement she made several years ago, and that the board lacked jurisdiction because it was unrelated to the current grievance complaint. Is she correct? a. Yes, because she has been practicing now for five years and has demonstrated her character and fitness to practice law, making the application queries moot. b. Yes, because it was improper for the board member to conduct a self-initiated investigation into her high school attendance merely because he had graduated from the same high school that the attorney listed on her original bar application. c. No, because the fact that she lied about her high school makes it likely that the current client complaint has merit as well. d. No, because if a person makes a material false statement in connection with an application for admission, it may be the basis for subsequent disciplinary action if the person is admitted.

d. No, because if a person makes a material false statement in connection with an application for admission, it may be the basis for subsequent disciplinary action if the person is admitted.

Challenging the constitutionality of the statute. An attorney worked for several years for a federal government agency in regulatory enforcement. Big Firm then hired the attorney for a substantially higher salary, and the attorney accepted the position and left her government position. One of the attorney's first assigned cases at Big Firm was a new action by the client against the same government agency for which the attorney had previously worked, defending against an enforcement action that the attorney had initiated while at the agency. The defense will involve challenging the constitutionality of a new regulation that the agency had recently promulgated. While at the agency, the attorney had not been involved with the review and promulgation of any new regulations, including the one at issue in the client's challenge, but instead worked exclusively on enforcement litigation matters. The government agency gives informed consent, confirmed in writing, to the representation. Is the attorney nevertheless subject to disqualification in the client's matter against the attorney's former employer? a. Yes, because allowing Big Firm to give government lawyers an unreasonably large salary increase for leaving her public service position and joining Big Firm in the private sector creates a conflict of interest for all lawyers in government service. b. Yes, because the attorney participated personally and substantially in the matter as a public officer or employee. c. No, because the case involves a constitutional challenge to the validity of a regulation, and the attorney was not personally and substantially involved in the drafting or promulgation of the regulation. d. No, because the appropriate government agency gave its informed consent, confirmed in writing, to the representation.

d. No, because the appropriate government agency gave its informed consent, confirmed in writing, to the representation.

An attorney is a general practitioner with extensive experience in personal injury litigation. The attorney has also handled legal malpractice cases but does not hold herself out to be experienced in such cases. A man contacted the attorney by telephone and asked her to represent him in a legal malpractice case that he wanted to file against the lawyer who had handled his divorce. The attorney refused even to meet with the man, saying that she was troubled by how high malpractice insurance premiums were getting and was not going to take any new legal malpractice cases. She did not offer to refer the man to other lawyers who took legal malpractice cases. The man tried to contact several other lawyers, each of whom indicated that he or she would be happy to accept the representation but was too busy to take on any new matters. Six months later the statute of limitations expired without the man filing his lawsuit. If the man can establish that a legal malpractice action against the divorce lawyer would have succeeded, is the attorney subject to discipline for refusing to accept the representation? a. Yes, because the attorney did have some experience in legal malpractice and could have agreed to representation. b. Yes, because the attorney did not make reasonable efforts to find a competent lawyer to represent the man. c. No, because the attorney does not hold herself out as experienced in legal malpractice cases. d. No, because the attorney had no legal obligation to accept the man's case.

d. No, because the attorney had no legal obligation to accept the man's case.

An attorney represented a client who was the plaintiff in a personal injury action. The personal injury action was settled, and the attorney received a check in the amount of $10,000 payable to the attorney. The attorney deposited the check in her clients' trust account. One day later, the attorney received a letter from a bank, which had heard of the settlement of the personal injury lawsuit. The bank informed the attorney that the client had failed to make his monthly mortgage payments for the last three months and demanded that the attorney immediately release $900 of the proceeds of the settlement to the bank or the bank would institute mortgage foreclosure proceedings against the client. The attorney informed the client of the bank's letter. The client did not dispute the $900 debt to the bank, but responded: "I don't care what the bank does. The property is essentially worthless, so let the bank foreclose. If the bank wants to sue me, I'll be easy enough to find. I don't think they'll even bother. You just take your legal fees and turn the rest of the proceeds over to me." Is the attorney subject to discipline if she follows the client's instructions? a. Yes, because the client did not dispute the $900 debt to the bank. b. Yes, because the attorney knows that the client is planning to force the bank to sue him. c. No, because the attorney did not represent the client in the mortgage matter. d. No, because the attorney has no duty to the bank.

d. No, because the attorney has no duty to the bank.

An experienced oil and gas developer asked an attorney to represent him in a suit to establish the developer's ownership of certain oil and gas royalties. The developer did not have available the necessary funds to pay the attorney's reasonable hourly rate for undertaking the case and proposed instead that, if he prevailed in the lawsuit, he would pay the attorney 20% of the first year's royalties recovered in the suit. Twenty percent of the first year's royalties would likely exceed the amount that the attorney would have received from charging his regular hourly rate. The attorney accepted the proposal. Is the attorney subject to discipline? a. Yes, because the agreement gave the attorney a proprietary interest in the developer's cause of action. b. Yes, because the fee was likely to exceed the amount that the attorney would have received from charging his regular hourly rate. c. No, because the developer rather than the attorney proposed the fee arrangement. d. No, because the attorney may contract with the developer for a reasonable contingent fee.

d. No, because the attorney may contract with the developer for a reasonable contingent fee.

Returning unused funds to the client after discharge. A client fired an attorney after two weeks of representation, long before the matter was complete. The client had prepaid a large refundable retainer, against which the attorney was to draw his fees as the representation went on. The client therefore has fully paid her fees up to that point to the attorney. The attorney is upset about the client discharging him without cause and believes it is unfair and wrongful. The attorney refuses to return the remainder of the fees and refuses to turn over any documents from the representation to the client. Is it proper for the attorney to take this course of action, if indeed the client had no good reason to discharge him? a. Yes, because a client must obtain court permission to discharge a lawyer before the representation is complete. b. Yes, it is proper for an attorney to retain the remaining funds and the documents. c. No, it is improper for an attorney to retain the unused funds, but an attorney may withhold the documents. d. No, it is improper for an attorney to retain either the unused funds or the documents.

d. No, it is improper for an attorney to retain either the unused funds or the documents.

The lateral move. Big Law Firm represented Conglomerate Corporation, but the primary lawyer who handled Conglomerate's matters left Big Law Firm, and Conglomerate Corporation followed the lawyer to his new firm for further representation on other matters. Some time later, Giant Company consulted with Big Law Firm about legal representation that would be materially adverse to Conglomerate Corporation. A partner at Big Law Firm accepts Giant's Company's new case. Would it be improper for the partner or other lawyers still working for Big Law Firm to provide representation to Giant Company in a lawsuit against Conglomerate Corporation, if the new matter has no substantial relationship to Conglomerate's previous legal matters? a. Yes, attorneys are imputed with knowledge of current or previous members of the firm, and attorneys with imputed knowledge shall not accept cases of potential clients whose interests would be materially adverse to those of a prior client of the firm. b. Yes, an attorney shall obtain the informed consent, confirmed in writing, of a client of a prior attorney's clients if the attorney is going to represent a different client with materially adverse interests. c. No, when a lawyer leaves a law firm, the rules regarding conflicts of interest and imputation do not apply. d. No, prior lawyers' knowledge is not imputed unless the matter is the same or substantially related and another lawyer in the firm has information that is material to the matter.

d. No, prior lawyers' knowledge is not imputed unless the matter is the same or substantially related and another lawyer in the firm has information that is material to the matter.

Refusing to consent. An attorney worked for several years for a federal government agency in regulatory enforcement. Big Firm then hired the attorney for a substantially higher salary, and the attorney accepted the position and left his government position. One of the attorney's first assigned cases at Big Firm was a new action by the client against the same government agency for which the attorney had previously worked, defending against an enforcement action that the attorney had initiated while at the agency. The defense will involve challenging the constitutionality of a new regulation that the agency had recently promulgated. While at the agency, the attorney had not been involved with the review and promulgation of any new regulations, including the one at issue in the client's challenge, but instead worked exclusively on enforcement litigation matters. The government agency refuses to consent to the attorney representing the client, who is the adverse party to the agency, in this matter, and seeks to disqualify Big Firm from representing the client. Is Big Firm subject to disqualification in the client's matter against the attorney's former employer? a. Yes, because allowing Big Firm to give government lawyers an unreasonably large salary increase for leaving his public service position and joining Big Firm in the private sector creates a conflict of interest for all lawyers in government service. b. Yes, because the attorney participated personally and substantially in the matter as a public officer or employee, and cannot recuse himself from representing the client, and the appropriate government agency gives its informed consent, confirmed in writing, to the representation. c. No, so long as Big Firm has policies and procedures in effect to supervise the attorney's work closely enough to ensure compliance with the Rules of Professional Conduct. d. No, so long as Big Firm screens the attorney in time from any participation in the matter and provides the agency with prompt written notice about the screening measures in effect.

d. No, so long as Big Firm screens the attorney in time from any participation in the matter and provides the agency with prompt written notice about the screening measures in effect.

Which is not an acceptable way to obtain pro bono clients? a. Through court appointment b. Through participation in legal services organizations or legal reform activities c. Through involvement in limited legal services d. None of the above

d. None of the above

Contingency fee is . . . a. Allowed under all circumstances b. Prohibited c. Allowed for personal injury cases only d. Prohibited in criminal matters.

d. Prohibited in criminal matters.

Client C retained Attorney A to appeal his criminal conviction and to seek bail pending appeal. The agreed-upon fee for the appearance on the bail hearing was $100 per hour. A received $1,600 from C, of which $600 was a deposit to secure A's fee and $1,000 was for bail costs in the event that bail was obtained. A maintained two office bank accounts: a fee account, in which all fees collected from clients were deposited and from which all office expenses were paid, and a clients' trust account. The attorney deposited the $1,600 in the clients' trust account the week before the bail hearing. She expended six hours of her time preparing for and appearing at the hearing. The effort to obtain bail was unsuccessful. Dissatisfied, C immediately demanded return of the $1,600. What should A do with the $1,600? a. Transfer the $1,600 to the fee account. b. Transfer the $600 to the fee account and leave $1,000 in the clients' trust account until the attorney's fee for the final appeal is determined. c. Transfer $600 to the fee account and send the client a $1,000 check on the clients' trust account. d. Send C a $1,000 check and leave $600 in the clients' trust account until the matter is resolved.

d. Send C a $1,000 check and leave $600 in the clients' trust account until the matter is resolved.

The appellate judge. An attorney spent several years working on the state intermediate appellate court as one of its nine justices in a state in which such judges run for election in the general elections every four years. When the attorney ran for re-election, she lost, and needed to return to private practice. The client wants the attorney to represent her in her appeal of a state trial verdict. The case previously came up on appeal before the state intermediate appellate court, but the attorney was not on the panel that decided the case. The state Supreme Court subsequently reversed the decisions of both the appellate court and the trial court and remanded the case for a new trial. The new trial resulted in an unfavorable verdict for the client, so she wants to appeal the case again. Would it be proper for the attorney to represent her in this matter? a. No, because the appeal will come before the very court for which the attorney worked as a judge, and the panel could include some of the attorney's former colleagues. b. No, because the state Supreme Court already reversed the decision of the state intermediate appellate court, so it is improper for the client to appeal the remanded case back to the same state intermediate appellate court again, as this could thwart the intentions of the Supreme Court. c. Yes, because it was not the judge's fault that the state Supreme Court reversed the previous appellate decision, making a new trial and subsequent appeals necessary, and that the opposing party has not settled the case in the meantime. d. Yes, because a judge who was a member of a multimember court, and thereafter left judicial office to practice law, is not prohibited from representing a client in a matter pending in the court, but in which the former judge did not participate.

d. Yes, because a judge who was a member of a multimember court, and thereafter left judicial office to practice law, is not prohibited from representing a client in a matter pending in the court, but in which the former judge did not participate.

A share of the divorce proceeds. An attorney agrees to represent a client in a divorce proceeding against her husband. The client is particularly concerned about obtaining her fair share of the marital property or assets—as much as possible, in fact—as well as a suitable level of child support for their children. The client agrees to pay the attorney his usual flat fee for divorce cases, $5,000, but also offers to pay him 10 percent of whatever he wins in terms of payments and distribution of assets, on top of his usual fee. After a protracted, acrimonious divorce proceeding, the attorney obtains a settlement worth approximately $2 million for the client. Is the attorney subject to discipline in this scenario? a. No, because the client proposed the arrangement and agreed to it beforehand. b. No, because the contingent fee was much lower than the typical contingent fee in personal injury cases, and the trial was long and acrimonious. c. Yes, because the attorney made a mixed flat-fee/contingent-fee arrangement, which is improper under the Rules of Professional Conduct. d. Yes, because the attorney entered into an arrangement for a fee in a domestic relations matter, the amount of which was contingent upon the amount of alimony, support, or property settlement.

d. Yes, because the attorney entered into an arrangement for a fee in a domestic relations matter, the amount of which was contingent upon the amount of alimony, support, or property settlement.

"I have needs." A wealthy heiress hired an attorney to represent her and her family in a complex federal case involving the family business and charges of securities fraud and racketeering. Early in the representation, the attorney and the client start dating and become sexually involved, to the consternation of the rest of the family. The client and her attorney rationalize the relationship by saying that they each have "needs" that their new romantic partner meets, and they have even discussed marriage as an eventuality. Is the attorney subject to discipline for this relationship? a. No, the Constitution does not allow a state bar or the judiciary to interfere in private matters such as a lawyer's consensual sexual relationships. b. Yes, the lawyer is representing the other family members as well, and they disapprove of the relationship at this time; if they approved of the relationship, it would be fine. c. No, because it appears this will be a long-term or permanent relationship, perhaps leading to marriage, so there is very little risk of the lawyer exploiting his client or the lawyer having clouded judgment. d. Yes, unless the sexual relationship predates the beginning of legal representation, the lawyer absolutely cannot represent a client with whom he has such a relationship.

d. Yes, unless the sexual relationship predates the beginning of legal representation, the lawyer absolutely cannot represent a client with whom he has such a relationship.

Client C agreed in writing with his defense attorney A that if A is able to negotiate his release from jail on bail, C will give him a brand new BMW. Is A subject to discipline? A. Yes, because contingent fee is prohibited under the circumstances. B. Yes, because he agreed to accept the car. C. No, because the arrangement is in writing as required by the rules. D. No, as long as the written agreement is signed by C.

A. Yes, because contingent fee is prohibited under the circumstances.

Client hired Attorney A to provide the legal services necessary to set up her professional business. Subsequently, a dispute arose between Client and Attorney A over the fees, and the fee dispute turned into litigation. To support his claims and defenses in the fee dispute, A had to disclose to the tribunal exactly what he did for Client and the complexity of the issues involved, which necessarily involved the disclosure of confidential information. Was it proper for Attorney A to disclose this confidential information about Client merely to prevail in a fee dispute? A. Yes, because the representation of Client ended when the fee dispute began, so Attorney A has no remaining duty of confidentiality to Client B. Yes, a lawyer may reveal information relating to the representation of a client to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary to establish a claim or defense on his or her behalf in a controversy between the lawyer and the client. C. No, because there is no exception to the confidentiality rule for fee disputes between a lawyer and client D. No, because Attorney A owed a duty of confidentiality to Client, even after the represented ended

B. Yes, a lawyer may reveal information relating to the representation of a client to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary to establish a claim or defense on his or her behalf in a controversy between the lawyer and the client.

Attorney A received advanced payment from his client C of $5,000. He properly placed it in the client trust account. Later he earned $2,000 for his work on the case and the matter was closed. At that time, he left the country for a world tour and did not return for 3 years. He totally forgot about that account. Upon his return 3 years later, A wrote a check to himself for $2,000 and sent the remaining $3,000 to C. Is A subject to discipline? A. No, because A only took the money that he earned. B. Yes, because A commingled funds shortly after the matter was closed. C. No, because the payment was not in dispute. D. No, because A lacked intent to defraud C.

B. Yes, because A commingled funds shortly after the matter was closed.

Peters & Jones law firm learned that one of its Partners P had gotten involved in a sexual relationship with the president of its corporate Client C he was representing in a high-profile, multi-million-dollar contract defense case. When questioned about the affair by other partners in the firm, P showed them a signed waiver by the Chairman of C's Board stating that the board had been advised of the relationship by the president, it does not object and waives any possible conflict of interest. Is P subject to discipline despite having produced the above-described document? A. Yes, because P did not reveal the relationship to his law partners as soon as it began. B. Yes, because C cannot waive such a conflict. C. No, because both P & vice-president are adults who consented to their relationship. D. No, if vice-president was not vulnerable or taken advantage of by C when the relationship began.

B. Yes, because C cannot waive such a conflict.

An attorney is active within a new political movement, and she has represented several members of the movement, who faced arrest or criminal charges for protesting and picketing. The attorney learns that police have arrested one of the prominent leaders of the movement for trespassing on private property during a protest, but that the movement leader is already out on bail. In response, the attorney calls the leader and offers to represent him in his case free of charge, explaining that she has experience representing other members of the movement in similar cases. The leader agrees to have the attorney represent him on a pro bono basis. The attorney wants to represent the leader because she admires him, but also because she believes it will generate terrific publicity for the firm's practice. Was it proper for the attorney to make this telephone solicitation? A. Yes, because the attorney believes in the leader's cause and is an active member of the movement. B. Yes, because the attorney did not charge for providing these legal services. C. No, because the attorney made a live telephone solicitation of a prospective client. D. No, because the attorney hopes to receive indirect benefit from the publicity that the representation will bring.

B. Yes, because the attorney did not charge for providing these legal services.

The law student intern. Years ago, as a law student, an attorney worked on a case for the client during a law firm internship. Now, the attorney's firm is representing a defendant in a lawsuit in which the client is the plaintiff. The client's new lawyer moves to disqualify the attorney's firm from the representation when it learns that the attorney worked for another firm on behalf of the client when the attorney was still a law student. Is the attorney's firm subject to disqualification in this case? a. Yes, because when lawyers are associated in a firm, none of them shall knowingly represent a client when any one of them practicing alone would be prohibited from doing so. b. Yes, unless both parties provided written informed consent and waived the conflict of interest at the beginning of representation. c. No, as long as the firm screens the attorney from any personal participation in the matter to avoid communication to others in the firm of confidential information that both the non-lawyers and the firm have a legal duty to protect. d. No, because the attorney was not yet a lawyer during the law student internship, and therefore did not actually provide legal representation for the client in the previous matter.

c. No, as long as the firm screens the attorney from any personal participation in the matter to avoid communication to others in the firm of confidential information that both the non-lawyers and the firm have a legal duty to protect.

Working with Washington lawyers. An attorney in a state that has adopted the Model Rules in their current form enters into a fee-sharing agreement with a lawyer admitted in Washington, D.C., which permits fee sharing with non-lawyers and multidisciplinary practices. They collaborate on a case and divide the fees as agreed. The attorney from the Model Rules state is aware that the other attorney will share his part of the fees with non-lawyers in the D.C. office; in fact, the D.C. lawyer's firm has accountants who hold an ownership share in that firm. Is the non-D.C. attorney subject to discipline for indirectly sharing legal fees with non-lawyers, given that he practices in a state that forbids fee sharing with non-lawyers? a. Yes, the attorneys have a duty to uphold the rules in their own jurisdiction, and given that the attorney knows that the other lawyer will share some of the fees with non-lawyers, he has violated the rule in his own state. b. Yes, but only because the lawyer had actual knowledge of the fee-sharing arrangement. c. No, as long as the first attorney shares fees only with another attorney, it does not matter if the other attorney shares fees with non-lawyers as permitted by his home jurisdiction. d. No, because the rule in the attorney's own state, prohibiting fee sharing with non-lawyers, is unconstitutional, according to the Supreme Court.

c. No, as long as the first attorney shares fees only with another attorney, it does not matter if the other attorney shares fees with non-lawyers as permitted by his home jurisdiction.

Attorney A just got divorced and is not in a good mood. He wants to take a vacation. However, prospective Client C would not take "no" for an answer and is threatening A to file a grievance against him if A refuses to represent C and fails to file a complaint on C's behalf in the next 10 days, which is all that is left in terms of the limitations period. Despite that, A refused to take on C's case without a specific explanation and did not even mention his divorce as an excuse. Is A subject to discipline? a. Yes, if C will suffer an undue hardship because he is not able to find an attorney within the next 10 days. b. Yes, if A did not send C an explanatory letter. c. No, because A has no duty to represent C. d. No, because A did not get advance notice of C's upcoming deadline.

c. No, because A has no duty to represent C.

Just the basics. An attorney represented a newspaper publisher in a defamation case brought by a popular actor. A radio talk show invited the attorney to participate in their afternoon program and respond to calls from the radio listeners. The first caller asked the attorney to explain the case involving the superhero that the popular actor had played in a recent film. The attorney mentioned that the actor (using the actor's legal name as it appeared in the pleadings, rather than his stage name or the character for which the actor was most famous), and the legal name of the publisher the attorney represented. He also explained that the lawsuit was over alleged defamation by the newspaper, and that the newspaper planned to raise an affirmative defense of truth, that is, it would attempt to show that the stories it printed about the actor were factually accurate, even if they were unflattering. The attorney also mentioned that the actor owns a home and a business in the state, which is a matter of public record, and this is the reason the case is in the courts in that state. Did the attorney violate the Rules of Professional conduct by making these statements on a radio talk show program? a. Yes, because a lawyer who is participating or has participated in litigation shall not make an extrajudicial statement that the lawyer knows, or reasonably should know, will be disseminated by means of public communication. b. Yes, because he explained that his side would assert the truth of the unflattering stories it published, which could prejudice the upcoming proceedings, and revealed where the actor lives. c. No, because a lawyer may state the claim, the defense involved, the identity of the persons involved, and matters in the public record. d. No, because a lawyer has a right to explain his client's side of the story and defend his client in public when the client has faced the stigma of a lawsuit.

c. No, because a lawyer may state the claim, the defense involved, the identity of the persons involved, and matters in the public record.

Emergency room patients. An attorney is dating a woman whose sister works as a nurse in a hospital emergency room. The attorney gives the nurse, his girlfriend's sister, a stack of his business cards and law firm brochures, and offers to pay her $200 for any clients who hire him because of her referrals, with the understanding that she will not refer patients to any other lawyers. The nurse recommends several patients per month to the attorney for representation in personal injury claims, and one or two per month actually hire the attorney to represent them. Is such an arrangement proper? a. Yes, because the nurse is closely related to the attorney, given that the attorney is dating her sister. b. Yes, because the attorney is not paying the nurse on a contingent fee basis. c. No, because a lawyer shall not give anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer's services, with certain exceptions not applicable here. d. No, because the fact that the attorney is dating her sister creates a conflict of interest if the nurse refers clients to the attorney.

c. No, because a lawyer shall not give anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer's services, with certain exceptions not applicable here.

According to the Model Rules: a. Pro bono work is mandatory. b. Pro bono work is mandatory up to 50 hours per year. c. Pro bono work is encouraged and the minimum recommendation is 50 hours per year. d. Pro bono work is encouraged and the minimum recommendation is 25 hours per year.

c. Pro bono work is encouraged and the minimum recommendation is 50 hours per year.

In preparing a DUI defense on behalf of her client, an attorney's investigator interviewed the bartender at a local pub. The bartender told the investigator about the client's drinking habits at the pub. The investigator subsequently reported the bartender's comments to the attorney. The bartender's comments are protected by a. Both Rule 1.6 and attorney-client privilege. b. Attorney-client privilege only. c. Rule 1.6 only. d. Neither attorney-client privilege nor Rule 1.6.

c. Rule 1.6 only.

Job hunting. An attorney worked for several years for a federal government agency in regulatory enforcement. The attorney was involved in several enforcement matters against Conglomerate Corporation. Big Firm has always represented Conglomerate Corporation in all its litigation and regulatory compliance matters. The attorney made a good impression on the Big Firm partners when serving as opposing counsel in the same litigation. At the end of a deposition of Conglomerate Corporation's executives during the discovery phase of an enforcement proceeding, Big Firm partners approached the attorney privately and asked if the attorney would be interested in leaving the agency for a position at Big Firm. The attorney explained that they would have to match his current salary at the government agency for him to consider the proposal. Big Firm then scheduled an employment interview with the attorney, at the end of which they offered to double his salary if he left the agency and accepted a position at Big Firm. The attorney decided to postpone deciding until the pending agency enforcement matters against Big Firm's client were complete, in order to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest. The matters dragged on for another year, however, and Big Firm eventually withdrew its offer. Is the attorney subject to discipline? a. No, because the attorney decided to postpone deciding until the pending agency enforcement matters against Big Firm's client were complete, in order to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest. b. No, because Big Firm eventually withdrew its offer and the attorney never actually went to work for Big Firm. c. Yes, because a lawyer currently serving as a public officer or employee shall not negotiate for private employment with any person who is involved as a party or as lawyer for a party in a matter in which the lawyer is participating personally and substantially. d. Yes, because Big Firm offered to double the attorney's salary instead of merely matching his current government salary, which creates a substantial conflict of interest for the attorney in any pending or future matters.

c. Yes, because a lawyer currently serving as a public officer or employee shall not negotiate for private employment with any person who is involved as a party or as lawyer for a party in a matter in which the lawyer is participating personally and substantially.

Against the odds. A client asked an attorney to represent him in a lawsuit. The attorney conducts some preliminary research and quickly discovers that the lawsuit is a long shot. In fact, based on the attorney's survey of the existing judicial decisions in very similar cases, the attorney estimates that they have only a 15 percent chance of winning, and it will depend on an extraordinarily lopsided jury, a strongly partisan judge whose political leanings go in their favor, as well as a mediocre lawyer representing the other side. Otherwise, all things being equal, the attorney advises the client that he is about 85 percent certain that they will not prevail. The client is willing to take risks, however, and urges the attorney to take the matter. The attorney reluctantly agrees, on the condition that he can charge a higher fee than usual, and files the lawsuit. Could the attorney be subject to discipline for bringing a frivolous claim? a. Yes, because the attorney knows from his research that the claim is very unlikely to prevail and is therefore wasting the court's time. b. Yes, because he should not have charged a higher fee in a case where the client is already facing unfavorable odds of winning, as this puts the client into an even worse position. c. No, because an action is not frivolous even though the lawyer believes that the client's position will not prevail in the end. d. No, because the client should control the overall objectives of the representation, even if the lawyer controls the specific strategies, methods, and tactics.

c. No, because an action is not frivolous even though the lawyer believes that the client's position will not prevail in the end.

If you don't win, you don't pay. An attorney interviewed an expert witness whom he thought he might hire to testify at a client's trial. The attorney explained he was meeting with several expert witnesses and would hire the one who he thought would seem most persuasive to the jury. The expert witness offered to work on a contingent fee basis; if the attorney did not win the case at which the expert testified, then no fee would accrue. The attorney would have to pay the expert witness only if his testimony were compelling enough to produce a favorable outcome in the case. The attorney thought that this would give the expert an incentive to prepare more thoroughly for trial, and that it would be fairer to the client, who would be left bankrupt if they lost at trial and would have trouble paying the expert's fee anyway. Would it be proper for the attorney to hire the expert witness under such terms? a. Yes, it is permissible to pay an expert witness a large fee. b. Yes, because if the client loses the case and would be unable to pay the fees to the lawyer and the expert, the same type of contingency would result either way. c. No, because it is improper to pay the expert witness a contingent fee. d. No, because a lawyer cannot offer any inducement to a witness to testify.

c. No, because it is improper to pay the expert witness a contingent fee.

Attorney A is handling a case for Client, and Client instructs A not to share any of the case details or any of Client's personal details or information with other attorneys in the firm. While preparing for a hearing, A consults with B, another attorney in his firm about the case. A tells B that Client would prefer that other attorneys in the firm not be involved in the case. A uses the information and guidance provided by B to achieve a successful outcome for the client at the hearing. Are A's actions proper? a. Yes, because lawyers are authorized to make disclosures when reasonably necessary or when it is in the client's best interest, even if the client instructs the attorney otherwise. b. Yes, because a lawyer may discuss with other members of the firm at which he is employed any issues regarding a case that is being handled by that firm. c. No, because lawyers shall not discuss a client's case if instructed by a client not to do so. d. No, because a lawyer shall not discuss a client's case with anyone, including other lawyers of the firm that is handling the case, unless specifically authorized to do so by the client.

c. No, because lawyers shall not discuss a client's case if instructed by a client not to do so.

The victim. An attorney works for a firm where another lawyer is representing the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit. The other lawyer has represented the defendant for a long time on unrelated, non-litigation matters, but the personal injury lawsuit is a new case. The victim, the plaintiff in the same personal injury lawsuit, was a college classmate of the attorney and he asks the attorney to represent him in the litigation. The attorney has not learned any confidential information yet about the defendant from his fellow associate at the firm, nor has the attorney learned any confidential information from the victim during their preliminary consultation. The firm decides to undertake the representation of the victim as well. The firm will carefully screen the attorney and lawyer from one another, forbidding them to discuss the case with each other or anyone else in the office, and ensuring that they do not have access to each other's files for the case. In addition, neither lawyer will receive a bonus from the fees received for this litigation. Under the Rules of Professional Conduct, is it proper for the attorney to represent the victim, given these circumstances? a. Yes, as long as the firm provides notice to the defendant and the victim about the specific screening procedures it has in place, and gives periodic certifications of compliance with the screening procedures. b. Yes, as long as both the clients provide written informed consent to the conflict of interest, after receiving a detailed explanation of the problems with common representation, and neither party has its fees paid by a third party. c. No, because the Rules of Professional Conduct impute the conflict of the other lawyer to the attorney, and screening procedures do not apply to conflicts between current clients. d. No, unless the attorney has already represented the victim in previous unrelated matters while working at another law firm, and joined the new law firm only recently.

c. No, because the Rules of Professional Conduct impute the conflict of the other lawyer to the attorney, and screening procedures do not apply to conflicts between current clients.

Exclusively federal practice. An attorney has a firm in a state in which the attorney lacks a license to practice law. The attorney's legal work, however, consists entirely of representing local inventors before the United States Patent and Trademark Office in Washington, D.C., either by correspondence or by traveling to appear there in patent proceedings. A relevant federal statute states that non-lawyers may represent patent applicants before the USPTO. The attorney does no other legal work for clients—if clients need representation for family law matters, employment matters, incorporating businesses, or personal injury suits, the attorney refers them to outside counsel. All the attorney's clients, however, are located in the state where the firm has its office, and the attorney is unlicensed there. Is the attorney subject to discipline? a. Yes, because the attorney is regularly engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in that state. b. Yes, because all the clients reside in a state where the attorney is unlicensed. c. No, because the attorney is providing services authorized by federal law, which preempts state licensing requirements. d. No, because the attorney has specialized in a single area of law and refers all other matters to outside counsel.

c. No, because the attorney is providing services authorized by federal law, which preempts state licensing requirements.

According to the Rules, involvement in Bar Admission process & disciplinary matters imposes a number of obligations on the following participants: A. Bar admission applicants. B. Members of the State Licensing Board. C. Attorneys mentioned in a specific application that are licensed in that state. D. Bar admission applicants and any attorney involved.

D. Bar admission applicants and any attorney involved.

Which of the following is least likely to result in a finding of professional misconduct? a. An attorney in a criminal matter pursues a legal strategy with which the client disagrees. The client is convicted. b. An attorney in a criminal matter prevents her client from testifying in his own defense. c. Without consulting her client, an attorney in a civil matter refuses a low-ball settlement offer. d. None of the above

a. An attorney in a criminal matter pursues a legal strategy with which the client disagrees. The client is convicted.

Let's fix this. An attorney is a fifth-year associate at a large firm, hoping to make partner in the next two or three years. She supervises the first-year associates at the firm. She learns that the most recently hired associate recently shredded some evidence that would have undermined a client's case, and then told the judge and opposing party that the missing documents had been in a briefcase that went missing when a burglar broke into the associate's car. The attorney knows this is not true and discusses it with the senior litigation partner, who finds the story amusing. Neither reports the associate's deception to the judge or opposing party. Which of the following statements is true regarding this situation? a. Both the attorney and the litigation partner are subject to discipline for not taking action to correct the associate's false statements and misconduct. b. The attorney is subject to sanctions, as she was directly supervising the associate, but the senior litigation partner was not involved, did not know about it at the time, and has no responsibility in the matter. c. The associate is subject to discipline, but neither the attorney nor the senior litigation partner would be subject to discipline, as they were not aware of the misconduct until after the fact. d. The senior litigation partner is subject to discipline because he has a responsibility to take reasonable measures to ensure that everyone in the firm complies with their ethical duties, but the attorney is not subject to discipline, as she is merely an associate at the firm.

a. Both the attorney and the litigation partner are subject to discipline for not taking action to correct the associate's false statements and misconduct.

Get all the facts out in the open. An attorney is representing the defendant in a personal injury trial between a celebrity plaintiff and a famous hotel, where the plaintiff claims to have suffered injuries due to unsafe conditions. On his way into the courthouse on the day of jury selection, reporters gather around the attorney hoping for comments. The attorney explains that his client has already made renovations to the hotel to ensure that no accidents happen in the future, even though they do not admit liability in the present case. He also explains that if his client loses, his insurance company will simply pay the damages, and lawsuits like this make everyone's insurance premiums go up. The client had previously given the attorney permission to talk to the media. Opposing counsel is standing nearby waiting for his turn to talk, and he expresses no objection to the first attorney giving interviews like this, or to the lawyer's comments. Are the attorney's statements proper? a. No, it violates the Model Rules for a lawyer to make public statements about information that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know is likely to be inadmissible as evidence in a trial and that would, if disclosed, create a substantial risk of prejudicing an impartial trial. b. Yes, because the other lawyer is present and did not object to the comments at the time, and the client has consented to the lawyer's media communications. c. No, because in civil trials a defendant's lawyer should not tell the press that his client denies liability in the case. d. Yes, the rules about trial publicity explicitly permit lawyers to talk about defenses in the case, and the client's mitigation efforts and public policy concerns over skyrocketing insurance rates could be the defendant's main arguments to the jury.

a. No, it violates the Model Rules for a lawyer to make public statements about information that the lawyer knows or reasonably should know is likely to be inadmissible as evidence in a trial and that would, if disclosed, create a substantial risk of prejudicing an impartial trial.

Not my brother's keeper. An attorney is a second-year associate at a law firm with no supervisory responsibilities. He learns that another second-year associate is working on a case in which the client is suing a company that the other associate used to represent at his previous firm, and the attorney suspects it is a substantially related matter. The firm has done nothing to screen the other associate from the matter. No one ever discusses it with the attorney, and the attorney does not know all the facts of the situation. Later, the client sues the firm for malpractice due to the conflict of interest and reports the matter to the state disciplinary authority. Which of the following is true regarding the attorney's involvement in the situation? a. The attorney does not have disciplinary liability for the conduct of the other associate, because he is neither a partner nor in a supervisory position and did not participate in the violations directly. b. The attorney is subject to discipline because he had an affirmative duty to inquire about the potential conflict and the lack of screening of this other associate. c. The attorney is subject to discipline because the Rules of Professional Conduct impute violations of any lawyer in the firm to all other lawyers in the firm. d. The attorney does not have disciplinary liability in this matter because the Rules of Professional Conduct do not impute conflicts of interest to other lawyers in the same firm just because the firm failed to screen one associate with a possible conflict with former clients.

a. The attorney does not have disciplinary liability for the conduct of the other associate, because he is neither a partner nor in a supervisory position and did not participate in the violations directly.

Nuremberg defense. An attorney is an associate in a litigation firm representing plaintiffs. In her current case, her supervising partner instructs her to assert that the defendant had an affirmative statutory duty to protect the plaintiff's interests, even though the attorney can find no statute to support this assertion. The attorney has brought this to the attention of her supervising partner, who rebuked her for questioning his authority and insisted that she do as he said. He assures her that the defendants will settle before trial anyway, so the bogus claim merely gives some psychological leverage during settlement negotiations, and it cannot do any harm. Moreover, the partner says that the attorney may not last long at the firm if she cannot follow instructions, which could have been a threat of termination. At a preliminary hearing, however, the judge confronts the attorney about the unsupportable claim, and she concedes that no statutory duty exists. The judge is irate and considers reporting the attorney to the state bar disciplinary authority. Which of the following is correct regarding the attorney's situation? a. The attorney is responsible for asserting a frivolous claim, even though her supervising partner insisted that she do it and threatened her with termination. b. The attorney is not responsible for asserting a frivolous claim, because her supervising partner insisted that she do it and threatened her with termination. c. Neither the attorney nor the partner would be subject to discipline so long as the case settles before trial and the bogus claim about statutory duties was not the sole basis for their complaint. d. If the partner had terminated the attorney for refusing to assert the frivolous claim, the state bar disciplinary authority would have compelled the firm to reinstate her.

a. The attorney is responsible for asserting a frivolous claim, even though her supervising partner insisted that she do it and threatened her with termination.

Respondeat superior. An attorney is a fifth-year associate at a large firm and is responsible for supervising the work of a first-year associate. The attorney, however, now spends most of his time in Singapore, trying to open a satellite office for the firm there to service one of its major corporate clients. He has not inquired into the associate's compliance with the Rules of Professional Conduct in over eighteen months, as they mostly communicate by e-mail regarding pending cases and assignments. To the best of his knowledge, though, the attorney believes the associate is following the rules, and he knows that the associate has attended two Legal Ethics CLE courses in the last year. Unbeknownst to the attorney, the new associate has been overbilling hours and has been neglecting certain client matters. Which of the following is true regarding the attorney's situation? a. The attorney is subject to discipline as a lawyer having direct supervisory authority over another lawyer who failed to make reasonable efforts to ensure that the other lawyer conforms to the Rules of Professional Conduct, even though there was no direction, ratification, or knowledge of the violation. b. The attorney is subject to discipline for effectively ratifying the associate's violations through his neglect of his supervisory role. c. The attorney is not subject to discipline because there was no direction, ratification, or knowledge of the violation. d. The attorney is subject to discipline because the Rules of Professional Conduct impute violations of any lawyer in the firm to all other lawyers in the firm.

a. The attorney is subject to discipline as a lawyer having direct supervisory authority over another lawyer who failed to make reasonable efforts to ensure that the other lawyer conforms to the Rules of Professional Conduct, even though there was no direction, ratification, or knowledge of the violation.

Protocols in place. An attorney is a partner in a medium-size firm. Another partner at the firm, the managing partner, is responsible for implementing policies and procedures to detect and resolve conflicts of interest, to account for client funds and property, to identify dates by which actions must occur in pending matters, and to ensure that inexperienced lawyers receive proper supervision. The managing partner, however, now spends most of his time in Singapore, trying to open a satellite office for the firm there to service one of its major corporate clients. The managing partner is rarely at the home office and has completely neglected the implementation of ethical policies in the firm, so that minimal safeguards or procedures are in place. One of the new associates has committed several serious violations of professional responsibilities in the last few months, including an egregious conflict-of-interest problem and several missed deadlines for filing responsive pleadings. The attorney knew nothing about the violations and was not directly supervising the associate, and tries not to meddle in any of the managing partner's responsibilities, including the implementation of ethical policies and procedures. Which of the following is correct? a. The attorney is subject to discipline as a partner in the firm for failing to make reasonable efforts to ensure that the firm has in effect measures giving reasonable assurance that all lawyers in the firm conform to the Rules of Professional Conduct. b. The attorney is not subject to discipline because it was the managing partner's job to implement measures giving reasonable assurance that all lawyers in the firm conform to the Rules of Professional Conduct. c. The attorney is not subject to discipline because he did not directly supervise the associate who violated the Rules of Professional Conduct. d. The attorney is subject to discipline because the Rules of Professional Conduct impute violations of any lawyer in the firm to all other lawyers in the firm.

a. The attorney is subject to discipline as a partner in the firm for failing to make reasonable efforts to ensure that the firm has in effect measures giving reasonable assurance that all lawyers in the firm conform to the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Just following orders. The attorney is an associate at a small firm, and her supervising partner instructs her to draft pleadings in a case for a client. The supervising partner knows that the statute of limitations has already run on the claim, and that the client had little or no factual evidence to support the claim in any case. The partner believes the opposing party will want to settle the claim quickly for a modest sum and will not bother to investigate issues such as the statute of limitations or the factual support for either side. The attorney follows the partner's instructions and drafts the pleadings, without checking the statute of limitations for this specific claim or conducting her own investigation into the facts of the case. Opposing counsel, however, is upset over the frivolous claim and reports the attorney to the state bar. Which of the following is correct regarding the attorney's situation? a. The attorney should not be responsible for asserting a frivolous claim, and the fact that she was just following orders could support her defense that she was unaware that the claim was frivolous. b. The attorney is responsible for asserting a frivolous claim, even though her supervising partner insisted that she do it. c. Neither the attorney nor the partner would be subject to discipline so long as the case settles before trial. d. If the partner had terminated the attorney for refusing to assert the frivolous claim, the state bar disciplinary authority would have compelled the firm to reinstate her.

a. The attorney should not be responsible for asserting a frivolous claim, and the fact that she was just following orders could support her defense that she was unaware that the claim was frivolous.

Relevant factors. A partner gives an associate the typed notes from a previous client interview conducted by the partner, and the associate has the task of drafting a complaint for a personal injury lawsuit based on the allegations in the notes. The associate has no direct contact with the client, and does not really have any way to verify whether the notes represent everything discussed in the interview (the notes are not a transcript) or whether the allegations are factually accurate, truthful, or tell the complete story. The associate completes the task as assigned, drafting the pleadings based on the notes. The associate then submits the drafted complaint to the partner for review. Later, the pleadings turn out to be frivolous, based on complete falsehoods. Which of the following is true regarding the associate attorney's role in drafting the complaint? a. The lack of opportunity for the associate to investigate or verify facts on her own will be a relevant factor for the state disciplinary authority in deciding whether to discipline the associate. b. The lack of opportunity for the associate to investigate or verify facts on her own will not be a relevant factor for the state disciplinary authority in deciding whether to discipline the associate. c. The client will be subject to discipline, but not her lawyers, who merely took her at her word and filed complaints based on what she told the lawyers. d. The associate will be subject to discipline for drafting a complaint based on interview notes rather than a transcript of the interview or a notarized affidavit.

a. The lack of opportunity for the associate to investigate or verify facts on her own will be a relevant factor for the state disciplinary authority in deciding whether to discipline the associate.

Reasonable resolution. An attorney is a new associate at a law firm, and the managing partner assigns her a new case, in which the firm will represent two co-plaintiffs in a personal injury case. The attorney is concerned that a conflict of interest could arise between the two plaintiffs and suggests that the firm should represent only one of them. When she discusses this with the managing partner, the managing partner disagrees, because the interests of the two plaintiffs seem perfectly aligned, and they can have each sign an informed consent form waiving the conflict up front. Both admit the question is a close one in terms of the ethical rules for conflicts of interest, but the managing partner insists that they proceed. Which of the following is true regarding this situation? a. The supervisor's reasonable resolution of the question should protect the subordinate professionally if the resolution subsequently faces a challenge. b. The attorney has a duty to follow her own judgment about her ethical obligations to clients under the Rules of Professional Conduct, even if that means ignoring the managing partner's instructions. c. The fact that the two discussed the potential conflict at length will help shield both of them from any professional repercussions if they turn out to be wrong later. d. The answer depends on whether the firm will receive a contingent fee if they prevail, as there is a strict prohibition on representing co-plaintiffs in a contingent fee case.

a. The supervisor's reasonable resolution of the question should protect the subordinate professionally if the resolution subsequently faces a challenge.

Responsibility versus liability. An attorney is a partner in a newer law firm that has no effective measures in place to ensure that lawyers in the firm conform to the Rules of Professional Conduct. An associate at the firm violates the rules, and the state bar investigates the policies and procedures in place at the firm. The state disciplinary authority has determined that the first attorney is subject to discipline for his failure to take reasonable measures to ensure conformity with the rules. Because of this determination and the subsequent sanction, which of the following is true? a. Whether a lawyer may be liable civilly or criminally for another lawyer's conduct is a question of law beyond the scope of the rules; the determination of a violation does not automatically mean that the partner attorney would be civilly or criminally liable. b. The fact that the state bar found the partner attorney guilty of a violation of the rules, and imposed a sanction, means the attorney is automatically liable in any legal malpractice action related to the violation. c. The fact that the state bar found the partner attorney guilty of a violation of the rules, and imposed a sanction, means the attorney is automatically guilty in any criminal prosecution related to the violation. d. The fact that the state bar already imposed a sanction for the violation precludes being subject to damages in a malpractice action or criminal sanctions in a criminal prosecution related to the same violation, due to the double jeopardy rules.

a. Whether a lawyer may be liable civilly or criminally for another lawyer's conduct is a question of law beyond the scope of the rules; the determination of a violation does not automatically mean that the partner attorney would be civilly or criminally liable.

Time for a change. A client, age eighteen, is facing criminal charges of sex with a minor, based on his sexual relationship with his thirteen-year-old girlfriend, who lives in the same tenement building. The relevant statute has strict liability for perpetrators—that is, no mens rea or scienter element—and places the victim's age cutoff for the most serious grade of felony at age fourteen. It is indisputable in the case that the defendant had a sexual relationship with the victim when she was thirteen, but the victim claims she wanted the relationship and willingly consented to the sexual contact with her boyfriend. A state psychologist examined the victim and included in his report that she was emotionally mature for her age and was making relationship decisions in the same way as an adult. Even though the attorney is certain that the trial court will convict the client, he believes there is a slight chance that he could convince an appellate court to take a loose view of the age-of-consent provision in the statute, either on substantive due process grounds or simply as a matter of progressive statutory construction. The attorney believes that many thirteen-year-olds, and even younger, are sexually active nowadays and that the criminal laws should reflect the changing values of society. The attorney agrees, therefore, to take the client's case and to use it as a test case to try to change the law of sexual consent in the appellate courts. Is it proper for the attorney to make a defense in a criminal case that goes against the clear statutory verbiage and established case precedent? a. Yes, because a claim or argument is not frivolous if the lawyer is making a good-faith argument for modification or reversal of existing law. b. Yes, because the statute has no mens rea requirement, but is a strict liability crime. c. No, because a lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous. d. No, because the unlikelihood that the lawyer will win on appeal, in contradiction to the plain language of the statute, makes the lawyer's fee in the case a contingent fee, which is not permissible in a criminal case.

a. Yes, because a claim or argument is not frivolous if the lawyer is making a good-faith argument for modification or reversal of existing law.

Post-game interview. An attorney is a litigator and finds it helpful to talk to jurors after a trial concludes to see what they thought about the performance of the lawyers in the case. Assuming the judge has not forbidden talking to jurors and the jurors are willing to talk to him, is it proper for the attorney to have conversations with jurors in their homes, a week after the trial? a. Yes, because a lawyer may communicate with a juror after the discharge of the jury and must respect the desire of the juror not to talk with the lawyer. b. Yes, so long as the lawyer does not talk about the merits of the case, the evidence, or the credibility of the witnesses. c. No, because a lawyer may talk to jurors after discharge only with opposing counsel present and while they are still at the courthouse. d. No, because a lawyer may not communicate ex parte with a juror, without an express authorization by the judge.

a. Yes, because a lawyer may communicate with a juror after the discharge of the jury and must respect the desire of the juror not to talk with the lawyer.

The innocent lunch at the diner. During a personal injury trial, the court took a lunchtime recess for an hour. The plaintiff's attorney from the case walked across the street from the courthouse to a familiar diner to buy lunch. The diner was very crowded, so it was difficult for patrons to find a table to sit and eat. After ordering his sandwich at the counter, the attorney noticed two jurors from his own trial standing with their food, waiting for a free table. One of the jurors asked the attorney if they could share a table with him when one became available. The attorney agreed, but he reminded them that they could not talk about the case. The three sat together and ate their sandwiches. The two jurors talked most of the time, getting to know each other—discussing their children, their jobs, and their pets. The attorney did not participate in the conversation except to answer their questions about how many children he had, and whether he owned any pets. Another juror from the trial was at the diner, and noticed the attorney sitting with the other two jurors, which he reported to the judge when court reconvened. Could the attorney be subject to discipline for sharing a table with the jurors during a lunch break? a. Yes, because a lawyer should not have any ex parte social contact with jurors during a proceeding, even if they do not discuss the case. b. Yes, because he allowed the two jurors to sit with each other and get to know each other, which makes it more likely they will influence each other during deliberations. c. No, because this is a civil trial rather than a criminal trial. d. No, because the lawyer did not discuss the case with the jurors at all and barely participated in their socializing.

a. Yes, because a lawyer should not have any ex parte social contact with jurors during a proceeding, even if they do not discuss the case.

The lying client. An attorney represented a client in a criminal prosecution. The client agreed to a plea bargain, and the case moved on to a sentencing hearing. The prosecution's pre-sentencing report to the judge erroneously indicates that the client has no prior convictions, and the trial judge asked the client directly whether that is true. The client affirmed that he had no prior criminal record, and the judge sentenced him leniently, giving him six months' probation. Yet the attorney had represented the client previously in another jurisdiction in a criminal matter, and he knew that the pre-sentencing report was erroneous. Before adjourning, the judge asked the attorney if he had anything else to say. Could the attorney be subject to discipline if he does not correct the judge's misperception about the client's criminal record? a. Yes, because the attorney must not allow his client to offer evidence that he knows to be false to a tribunal. b. Yes, because the client committed perjury when he answered the judge's question in the courtroom, once the court was in session for the sentencing hearing. c. No, because a lawyer cannot violate his ethical duty of confidentiality to his client. d. No, because the attorney did not make the false statement, and has no duty to correct the false statements of others.

a. Yes, because the attorney must not allow his client to offer evidence that he knows to be false to a tribunal.

Living across the state line. An attorney lives in the border town of Nashua, New Hampshire, which is a forty-five-minute drive from Boston, Massachusetts. The attorney took the Massachusetts bar exam and passed it, and now seeks admission to the bar in that state, as she has a job offer from a firm in Boston and plans to commute there every day from her home in New Hampshire. The state bar of Massachusetts has a rule that lawyers must be residents of the state to obtain a license to practice law there on a regular basis, so it declines her application to the bar. When the attorney challenges this decision in federal court, will she prevail? a. Yes, because the residency requirement violates the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the U.S. Constitution. b. Yes, because the residency requirement violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution. c. No, because state courts have inherent authority to regulate the lawyers who practice in that state. d. No, because as an out-of-state resident, she lacks standing to challenge a regulation in that state.

a. Yes, because the residency requirement violates the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The pundit on the courthouse steps. An attorney is engaged in civil litigation. On his way into the courthouse on the day of jury selection, reporters gather around the attorney hoping for comments. The attorney explains that the (unrelated) criminal trial happening at the courthouse that day is far more important, and he expresses regret that he is not involved in that case at all. He states that he believes the criminal case should result in an acquittal because the police (who are testifying as witnesses in the case) violated the defendant's civil liberties, and because the relevant penal statute itself, which furnished the basis for charges in the case, violates the Bill of Rights. His own civil case, he says, is a brief matter scheduled for a one-day trial, so he hopes to observe the closing arguments tomorrow in the important criminal case in the other courtroom. Are the attorney's statements proper? a. Yes, because the rule limiting trial publicity applies only to lawyers who are, or who have been involved in the investigation or litigation of a case. b. Yes, because the attorney is expressing opinions about the constitutionality of a law and of the state's actions, and such statements receive special protection under the First Amendment. c. No, because the attorney is commenting on the character or reputation of police who will be witnesses in the case. d. No, because the attorney's arguments would be inadmissible at trial, if the courts have already upheld the constitutionality of the statute and the police actions in this circumstance.

a. Yes, because the rule limiting trial publicity applies only to lawyers who are, or who have been involved in the investigation or litigation of a case.

Leverage. An attorney represents Conglomerate Corporation in a lawsuit against the company brought by an individual plaintiff. The lawsuit could bring bad publicity to Conglomerate Corporation and could adversely affect its stock share price. Conglomerate offers to settle the matter quietly, but the plaintiff rejects the settlement offer. The attorney then files a counterclaim against plaintiff, alleging libel and slander of Conglomerate Corporation, vexatious litigation, and tortious interference with contract, for which he demands millions of dollars in damages. The attorney and plaintiff's counsel both know these counterclaims lack any basis in fact, and that they will be costly for plaintiff to defend. The attorney uses the counterclaims as leverage in reopening the settlement negotiations, offering to withdraw the counterclaims if plaintiff will accept a new, slightly higher settlement offer. The plaintiff calculates the cost of defending against the counterclaims and the difference between the settlement offer and the expected damages if plaintiff wins at trial, and reluctantly agrees to accept the terms of the offer. Could the attorney be subject to discipline for filing the counterclaims? a. Yes, because there is no factual basis for the claims, and the lawyer did not bring them in good faith. b. Yes, because the lawyer used the counterclaims as leverage to induce the opposing party into accepting an unfavorable settlement. c. No, because an advocate has a duty to use legal procedure for the fullest benefit of the client's cause. d. No, because the claims and counterclaims settled before going to trial, so the lawyer did not violate his duty of candor to the court.

a. Yes, because there is no factual basis for the claims, and the lawyer did not bring them in good faith.

In a disciplinary proceeding in front of the State Licensing Board. . . a. an accused attorney may appear pro se or be represented by counsel. b. a complainant may recover punitive damages. c. a complainant may recover compensatory damages. d. a complainant may prevail in a negligence action or another tort.

a. an accused attorney may appear pro se or be represented by counsel.

In a discussion with his attorney, a client admits to a murder for which another person has been wrongfully convicted. That person has been convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death. Under Model Rule of Conduct 1.6 the attorney a. may reveal the exculpatory information. b. must reveal the exculpatory information. c. must withdraw from continued representation of the confessed murderer. d. None of the above

a. may reveal the exculpatory information.

Which of the following would most likely result in a finding of professional misconduct? a. An attorney notified his client that he was in the middle of a trial on behalf of another client and would be less accessible during the following week. The client's case was not prejudiced, but the client was frustrated that he was unable to have the undivided attention of his attorney. b. An attorney without any experience in medical malpractice law takes on a medical malpractice case. Although he completely mismanages the case, he gets a default judgment. c. An attorney gives legal advice during a free consultation. d. All of the above

b. An attorney without any experience in medical malpractice law takes on a medical malpractice case. Although he completely mismanages the case, he gets a default judgment.

The factors for determining whether a lawyer's fee is reasonable includes all categories below, EXCEPT: a. The time required b. Law School Attorney graduated from c. Attorney's experience d. Preclusion from other employment

b. Law School Attorney graduated from

Profit sharing for paralegals. An attorney practices personal injury law, representing plaintiffs on a contingent fee basis. The attorney employs a paralegal to assist with preparing documents for litigation. The paralegal's salary arrangement is 10 percent of the firm's total net revenue each year. In years when the attorney wins several large cases, the paralegal receives higher wages, and in years when the attorney has no big wins, the paralegal receives almost nothing. The paralegal does not bring clients to the firm and does not participate in judgments about which clients to represent, or about how to handle the cases. Is the attorney subject to discipline for this arrangement? a. Yes, unless the paralegal has a law degree and has obtained a law license in another state. b. No, because non-lawyers may participate in a firm compensation plan based on overall profit sharing. c. Yes, because the paralegal here is engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. d. No, because the rules treat paralegals the same as lawyers for purposes of sharing fees or profits.

b. No, because non-lawyers may participate in a firm compensation plan based on overall profit sharing.

Flight risk. An attorney was representing a client in a criminal matter. At the bail hearing, the prosecutor told the court that the defendant was a flight risk, and he asked the court either to confine the defendant until trial or to set bail at $15,000. When it was the attorney's turn to speak, he assured the judge that the client had a medical condition that would prevent him from leaving the area, and that the client did not intend to flee the jurisdiction, but was confident that he could stand trial and clear his name of all charges. The attorney knew, however, that the client already had plane tickets to Venezuela, a non-extradition country, and that the client had already fully recovered from his serious medical condition. Is the attorney subject to discipline for making these statements to the court? a. Yes, because there is no constitutional right to have bail in state court. b. Yes, because a lawyer may not knowingly make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal. c. No, because the statements made at a bail hearing would not affect the merits or outcome of the case. d. No, because the lawyer does not know with certainty that the client will actually flee the jurisdiction, and he cannot say with medical certainty that the client's medical condition will not relapse.

b. Yes, because a lawyer may not knowingly make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal.

See you next summer. A prosecutor in a felony drug case addressed a group of reporters outside the District Attorney's office. In response to questions about the specific case underway, the prosecutor explained that the judge had consolidated the trials of three co-defendants into a single proceeding and had postponed the proceeding until the next summer, four months away. Was it proper for the prosecutor to disclose such details about the case to reporters? a. Yes, because the public has a right to know how the details of a criminal prosecution, as the taxpayers are paying the prosecutor's salary. b. Yes, because a lawyer may tell reporters the scheduling or result of any step in litigation. c. No, because no lawyer associated in a firm or government agency subject to the Rules of Professional Conduct shall make a statement prohibited by the rules. d. No, because criminal jury trials will be most sensitive to extrajudicial speech.

b. Yes, because a lawyer may tell reporters the scheduling or result of any step in litigation.

A clean slate. A client is aware that he is under investigation for student loan fraud. A friend who works at the courthouse tips off the client that a magistrate issued a warrant to search the client's home for evidence the next day in the early morning. In a panic, the client calls his attorney and asks what he should do. The attorney informs him that the agents executing the warrant will surely seize any computers and hard drives that they find, and that the client should probably wipe and reformat all his drives or dispose of his computers, that he should probably smash his cell phone, and that he might want to go on a long vacation immediately. Is the attorney subject to discipline for this advice? a. Yes, because the Sixth Amendment right to counsel does not arise until formal adjudicatory proceedings begin. b. Yes, because a lawyer shall not counsel or assist another person to destroy or conceal a document or other material having potential evidentiary value. c. No, because the traditional rules against destroying documentary evidence apply only to printed copies, not to electronic files stored on a computer hard drive. d. No, because until the police execute the warrant and legally seize the computers, they are the client's private property and he can do whatever he wants with them.

b. Yes, because a lawyer shall not counsel or assist another person to destroy or conceal a document or other material having potential evidentiary value.

An attorney managed her own practice as a sole practitioner and needed to attract more clients. One day, she heard that Paul Johnston, a former classmate from law school, was facing disciplinary action by the state bar for making live telephone solicitations of prospective clients. The attorney called Johnston and offered to represent him in his hearing before the grievance committee for a fee of $400 per hour, which is higher than the usual rate for such representation. The attorney's motivation was primarily for pecuniary gain, not concern for her former classmate. Could the attorney be subject to discipline for making this live telephone solicitation of her former law school classmate? a. Yes, because the attorney offered to represent the prospective client for a higher-than-average fee. b. Yes, because the attorney solicited professional employment when a significant motive for doing so was pecuniary gain. c. No, because the person she solicited as a prospective client was also a lawyer. d. No, because the prospective client is an acquaintance from law school.

c. No, because the person she solicited as a prospective client was also a lawyer.

Attorney A is a partner in a law firm, and she is married to the owner of an independent retail-clothing store. The firm undertakes representation of a clothing wholesaler, who is suing the same independent clothing store over nonpayment for shipments of merchandise. Attorney A's husband hires another firm to represent his store in the lawsuit, and his lawyer asks the court to disqualify Attorney A's firm because of her position there. Should the firm be subject to disqualification? a. Yes, because the conflict of interest is too great where the defendant's spouse works for opposing counsel's firm. b. Yes, because the lawsuit involves nonpayment for a shipment of merchandise, and Attorney A indirectly benefited from her husband keeping these unpaid funds. c. No, if the firm screens Attorney A from any involvement in the case or from access to any confidential information about the case. d. No because Attorney A is the only partner with this conflict.

c. No, if the firm screens Attorney A from any involvement in the case or from access to any confidential information about the case.

Just a clerk. An attorney represented a client in an action for replevin. After the filing of the case, but before the court had sent any notices about the docket number, the attorney spoke to a clerk at the courthouse, and inquired whether the case had received an assignment yet to a judge. The clerk said it was still unassigned. The attorney then asked the clerk to mention to the Director of Judicial Administration, who was also the Chief Presiding Judge, that they should not assign the case to a particular judge, who was notorious for having a bias against parties like the attorney's client, and who had an extraordinarily high reversal rate from the appellate courts in replevin cases. The clerk said he would mention the conversation to the Director, which he did. The Director said she could not accommodate special requests from lawyers regarding case assignments, but when it came time to assign the case, she assigned the case to another judge merely to avoid another embarrassing reversal from the appellate courts. Was it improper for the attorney to ask the clerk to pass his concerns along to the Director? a. Yes, because he should have waited until the case was assigned before asking the administrator to reassign it to another judge. b. Yes, because during a proceeding a lawyer may not communicate ex parte with persons serving in an official capacity in the proceeding, such as judges, masters, or jurors, unless authorized to do so by law or court order. c. No, because the attorney did not actually speak ex parte with the judicial officer, but instead spoke with a front-counter clerk. d. No, because the case had not yet been assigned to any judge.

b. Yes, because during a proceeding a lawyer may not communicate ex parte with persons serving in an official capacity in the proceeding, such as judges, masters, or jurors, unless authorized to do so by law or court order.

The witness. A witness testified on a client's behalf at trial. That evening, when the attorney was reviewing exhibits and documents to prepare for the next day of trial, he noticed a document that completely negated the witness' testimony from earlier that day. The testimony was material evidence in the case. The witnesses left the jurisdiction after his testimony concluded, and he is no longer available to correct the false statements. The opposing party's lawyer waived his opportunity to cross-examine the witness, because the testimony was unfavorable to his side and he was eager to move on to a more favorable witness. Does the attorney have a duty to take remedial measures to correct the false testimony, such as disclosing the falsehood to the court? a. Yes, because no proper cross-examination occurred, which violated the other party's constitutional rights. b. Yes, because if a witness called by the lawyer has offered material evidence, and the lawyer comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal. c. No, if a witness called by the lawyer has offered material evidence and the lawyer comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer has no duty to correct the information if the opposing counsel waived his right to cross-examination. d. No, because the lawyer did not realize at the time of the testimony that it was false, and therefore did not knowingly offer any false statements to the tribunal.

b. Yes, because if a witness called by the lawyer has offered material evidence, and the lawyer comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal.

Everything is covered. An attorney located a witness who could corroborate his client's story. The witness, however, was afraid of retaliation from others if she testified, and did not want to be involved. The witness also lives 1,000 miles away and works as a waitress, so she cannot afford the travel expenses and lodging, and cannot afford to miss work, because she receives no wages if she does not work. The attorney offers to pay all the witness's expenses. The attorney then pays for airfare and pays to put the witness in one of the nicest hotels in the city and pays for all of the witness's dining bills at expensive downtown restaurants. The witness reluctantly agrees. Was it proper for the attorney to offer to pay the expenses for a favorable witness to undergo the trouble of testifying at the trial? a. Yes, because expert witnesses routinely charge large sums to testify at trial, so it is proper for a non-expert to receive a modest amount of compensation, especially if she is fearful of adverse consequences from testifying. b. Yes, because it is proper to pay a witness's expenses, so long as the attorney does not offer to pay the witness an inducement to provide favorable testimony. c. No, because it is improper to pay an occurrence witness any fee for testifying. d. No, because it is proper to compensate a witness only if the lawyer will also compensate a witness for the opposing party.

b. Yes, because it is proper to pay a witness's expenses, so long as the attorney does not offer to pay the witness an inducement to provide favorable testimony.

The disbarred lawyer-agent. A firm specializing in sports law represented several professional athletes as clients. The state disciplinary authorities suspended and eventually disbarred one of the associates at the firm, but the disciplinary action did not implicate the rest of the firm (the lawyer's misconduct had occurred completely outside the scope of his duties there). The firm retained the disbarred lawyer as a sports agent for some of the athletes who were clients of the firm. The disbarred lawyer would draft contracts for the athletes and negotiate deals for the firm's clients with their sports teams or with companies seeking the athlete's product endorsement. Could the partners at the firm be subject to discipline for facilitating the disbarred lawyer in the unauthorized practice of law? a. Yes, because a firm may never have any business dealings with a disbarred attorney. b. Yes, because the disbarred lawyer is engaging in the unauthorized practice of law by drafting and negotiating contracts for the firm's clients. c. No, because the firm is not representing that the disbarred lawyer is an attorney and the agent does not have his own clients. d. No, because the disbarred attorney is working under the supervision of licensed attorneys.

b. Yes, because the disbarred lawyer is engaging in the unauthorized practice of law by drafting and negotiating contracts for the firm's clients.

Concerned criticism for the judge. During a trial, the judge overruled an objection by one of the attorneys. The attorney felt that the judge had made a fundamental error and had ignored a clear provision of the official Rules of Evidence. Court adjourned for the day a few minutes later, and the judge retreated to his chambers. The attorney approached the judge's clerk, who was still in the courtroom, and gave him a handwritten note, folded into a square, to pass along to the judge. The clerk gave the note to the judge. The note thanked the judge for recently inviting the attorney to the judge's home, along with sixty other people from the legal community, for a holiday party. It also said that the judge had made a mistaken ruling on the attorney's objection that day, and it referred the judge to the relevant provision of the Rules of Evidence. Could the attorney be subject to discipline for his actions? a. Yes, because the lawyer was mixing personal matters with his representation of a client. b. Yes, because the lawyer communicated ex parte with a judge during the proceeding, without being authorized to do so by law or court order. c. No, because the note did not directly ask the judge to take a position on the merits of the case. d. No, because the lawyer did not speak to the judge directly, but instead gave a note to the clerk, who is not a judicial officer.

b. Yes, because the lawyer communicated ex parte with a judge during the proceeding, without being authorized to do so by law or court order.

But he started it. An attorney is representing the defendant in a highly publicized criminal trial. On his way into the courthouse on the day of jury selection, reporters gather around the attorney hoping for comments. The attorney explains that the prosecutor already held a press conference in which she shared that the defendant had refused to take a polygraph test, that DNA tests had confirmed the defendant's guilt, and that the defendant had refused several offers of guilty pleas. To set the record straight before trial, the defense attorney explains that his client had already agreed to take a polygraph test but that none had occurred. He adds that defense experts would testify about problems with the DNA tests, and that the plea offers had all been the same (a life sentence instead of the death penalty) and were unacceptable to the client. Were the defense attorney's statements proper? a. Yes, because the First Amendment and Sixth Amendment protect a defendant's right to defend himself publicly through his attorney against false accusations. b. Yes, when others have publicly made prejudicial statements, responsive statements may have the salutary effect of lessening any resulting adverse impact on the adjudicative proceeding. c. No, because there is a presumption of prejudicial effect on the proceedings when a lawyer comments publicly about the possibility of a guilty plea, or a party's refusal to confess to a crime. d. No, because there is a presumption of prejudicial effect on the proceedings when a lawyer comments publicly about the performance or results of any examination or test or the refusal or failure of a person to submit to an examination or test.

b. Yes, when others have publicly made prejudicial statements, responsive statements may have the salutary effect of lessening any resulting adverse impact on the adjudicative proceeding.

Have your secretary make a visit. An attorney represented a client in a prosecution for murder, and the prosecutor was seeking the death penalty. The trial was not going well, and the judge had not sequestered the jury, so the attorney sent his secretary to visit some of the jurors in their homes one evening, bringing them cookies and talking to them about the seriousness of sentencing a fellow human being to death. The secretary did not say she worked for the attorney, but instead introduced herself as a member of an advocacy group that seeks to abolish the death penalty, and she left pamphlets about abolishing the death penalty in each juror's home. Could the attorney be subject to discipline for this activity? a. No, because the attorney did not in fact speak to any of the jurors directly and therefore had no ex parte contact with them. b. No, because the attorney did not have the secretary discuss the merits of the case or the evidence, but only the morality of the death penalty, which is a serious public policy issue. c. Yes, because he was communicating ex parte with the jurors through the secretary during the proceeding. d. Yes, because the secretary did not inform the jurors that she worked for the attorney.

c. Yes, because he was communicating ex parte with the jurors through the secretary during the proceeding.

The marketing guru and his contract. The attorney hires a nationally known Internet-marketing specialist, a tech guru, to help develop the firm's reputation and attract new clients. The Internet specialist has made millions on previous tech startups, while the attorney is not well known and has been practicing for only two years. The tech guru demands certain terms in the contract that require the attorney to confer with the tech guru about accepting clients that were former clients of the tech guru, to avoid conflicts of interest. The attorney must also clear any litigation positions, approaches, or strategies that pertain to intellectual property or Internet marketing liability with the tech guru, to avoid positions that would jeopardize the guru's other business. Is the attorney subject to discipline for this arrangement? a. No, because the attorney is merely hiring an advertising specialist and can pay normal rates for such services. b. No, because the contract merely reflects the lawyer's duty under the Model Rules to avoid conflicts of interest between current clients. c. Yes, because in this case, a non-lawyer has a contractual right to direct or control the professional judgment of the lawyer. d. Yes, because the attorney is advertising online, which means Internet users in other states can see the firm's advertisements and offers of representation, even though the attorney does not have a license to practice in most of those jurisdictions.

c. Yes, because in this case, a non-lawyer has a contractual right to direct or control the professional judgment of the lawyer.

Profit sharing and votes for paralegals. An attorney practices personal injury law, representing plaintiffs on a contingent fee basis. The attorney employs a paralegal to assist with preparing documents for litigation. The paralegal's salary arrangement is 10 percent of the firm's total net revenue each year. In years when the attorney wins several large cases, the paralegal receives higher wages, and in years when the attorney has no big wins, the paralegal receives almost nothing. The paralegal does not bring clients to the firm, but does participate in judgments about which clients to represent, how to structure contingent fee arrangements, and how much to seek in damages after a verdict, as these matters directly affect the paralegal's income as well as the attorney's. Could the attorney be subject to discipline for this arrangement? a. Yes, unless the paralegal has a law degree and is admitted in another state. b. No, because non-lawyers may participate in a firm compensation plan based on overall profit sharing. c. Yes, because this paralegal is sharing profits with the attorney, and is able to influence the professional judgment of the lawyer under this arrangement. d. No, because the rules treat paralegals the same as lawyers for purposes of sharing fees or profits.

c. Yes, because this paralegal is sharing profits with the attorney, and is able to influence the professional judgment of the lawyer under this arrangement.

Grandchild G, a licensed attorney, represented his Grandfather GR in various lawsuits brought against the ABC Company owned by GR. One day, GR ended up in the hospital with a serious heart condition. During one of his hospital visits, G talked to GR about his physical condition and age and said GR needs to think about preparing his final will & testament document. G then offered to draft the document for GR. Specifically, G suggested that GR include him in the will giving him half-ownership of ABC. He thought it would be fair to divide the company equally between him & another grandchild. Is G subject to discipline for his conduct? a. Yes, because a lawyer is prohibited from soliciting gifts. b. Yes, because a lawyer is prohibited from drafting a will that gives him a substantial gift. c. No, because GR is a former client. d. No, because GR is his grandfather.

d. No, because GR is his grandfather.

My client is a suspicious character. A client hired an attorney to represent him in a simple real estate matter. When the attorney asked some standard questions about the financial arrangements for the sale and purchase of the property, the client was somewhat evasive on a few points, but provided the information necessary to complete the legal work for the transaction. The attorney also heard from a friend that the client frequently cavorted with prostitutes. The attorney finds the client suspicious and has many unanswered questions, but none surrounding the transaction that occasioned the representation. Does the attorney have an ethical duty to inquire into the affairs of a suspicious client? a. Yes, because it is possible that the client is engaging in some kinds of illegal activity, and it is important to uncover whatever that might be. b. Yes, because the attorney has a right to know what kind of person he is representing in this simple real estate transaction. c. No, because a lawyer must never invade the privacy of a client in any way. d. No, because a lawyer ordinarily has no duty to initiate investigation of a client's affairs or to give advice that the client has indicated is unwanted.

d. No, because a lawyer ordinarily has no duty to initiate investigation of a client's affairs or to give advice that the client has indicated is unwanted.

I know it in my heart. During opening arguments in a criminal trial before a jury, an attorney, who was representing the defendant, closed his statements by declaring, "My client is innocent; I know it in my heart. By the end of the trial, I am confident that you will agree with me that this is an innocent man." Are such comments proper for a defense lawyer to make during trial? a. Yes, because we presume that every defendant is innocent until proven guilty. b. Yes, because the fact that the defendant has pleaded not guilty has already put that assertion before the jury. c. No, because such comments could manipulate and prejudice a jury, even though the comments would be acceptable in a bench trial. d. No, because at trial, a lawyer shall not state a personal opinion as to the guilt or innocence of an accused.

d. No, because at trial, a lawyer shall not state a personal opinion as to the guilt or innocence of an accused.

Attorney A agreed to represent Client, a foreign national living in the United States. Client explained to A that he was a business owner who operated several small grocery stores catering to immigrants from Client's home country. Nothing seemed suspicious to Attorney until they were about to consummate a deal on the purchase of a small parcel of commercial real estate, and Client insisted on paying with cash, arriving at the closing with duffle bags containing bundles of twenty-dollar bills. The parties completed the sale and title transferred to one of Client's businesses, 7777777 LLC. A became suspicious that Client might be laundering money through such transactions. Would it be proper for Attorney to inform the FBI about the transaction without Client's consent? a. Yes, a lawyer functions as a gatekeeper to the financial system and has an ethical duty to report any suspicion of money laundering. b. Yes, a lawyer may disclose confidential information to prevent the client from committing a crime or fraud that the lawyer suspects might result in substantial injury to the financial interests or property of another and in furtherance of which the client has used or is using the lawyer's services. c. No, because there is no indication here that the transaction could lead to reasonably certain death or serious bodily injury. d. No, because it would violate the duty of confidentiality under the Rules of Professional Conduct.

d. No, because it would violate the duty of confidentiality under the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Recent graduates awaiting their bar results. An attorney hires three new associates upon their graduation from law school in a neighboring state. The associates passed the bar in the neighboring state, but they are still unlicensed in the attorney's state. The associates confine their work to conducting research, reviewing documents, and attending meetings with witnesses in support of the attorney, who is responsible for all the litigation. The research done by the associates, however, is far beyond the capabilities of a paralegal or a typical law student associate. Is the attorney subject to discipline for this arrangement? a. Yes, because the attorney has facilitated the unauthorized practice of law by the associates. b. No, because the associates are licensed in a neighboring state, which presumably has similar laws and precedents. c. Yes, because the attorney is relying on research done by lawyers unlicensed in that jurisdiction. d. No, because the associates merely conduct delegated work under the attorney's supervision, for which the attorney is ultimately responsible.

d. No, because the associates merely conduct delegated work under the attorney's supervision, for which the attorney is ultimately responsible.

The $10,000 witness. After much effort, an attorney located a witness who could fully corroborate his client's story and could impeach the testimony of the opposing party's star witness. The witness, however, was afraid of retaliation from others if she testified, and did not want to be involved. The attorney offered the witness $10,000 to appear at the trial for one afternoon and testify for an hour or two. The witness reluctantly agreed. Was it proper for the attorney to offer to pay a favorable witness to undergo the trouble of testifying at the trial? a. Yes, because expert witnesses routinely charge large sums to testify at trial, so it is proper for a non-expert to receive a modest amount of compensation, especially if she is fearful of adverse consequences from testifying. b. Yes, because the goal of the trial is to determine the facts of what happened, and it is important to have every material witness testify in order to corroborate the truth and impeach the false statements of others. c. No, because the lawyer offered the witness an unreasonably large amount of money. d. No, because the common law rule in most jurisdictions is that it is improper to pay an occurrence witness any fee for testifying apart from expenses.

d. No, because the common law rule in most jurisdictions is that it is improper to pay an occurrence witness any fee for testifying apart from expenses.

He started it, but you took it too far. An attorney is representing the defendant in a highly publicized trial. On his way into the courthouse on the day of jury selection, reporters gather around the attorney hoping for comments. The attorney explains that the prosecutor already held a press conference in which she shared that the defendant had refused to take a polygraph test, and that DNA tests had confirmed the defendant's guilt. The attorney explains that polygraph tests are inadmissible due to their unreliability, and that the DNA results are in dispute and will be the subject of expert testimony at trial. He adds that the sleazy prosecutor has a habit of holding such press conferences to prejudice the proceedings before every criminal trial, and that it merely reveals that the prosecutor's cases are too weak to win on the merits without such stunts. His client, he says, is now guilty until proven innocent, which is a shame considering the serious criminal charges in the case. He also mentions that the state's star witness is a dangerous convicted felon who is testifying in exchange for early release from prison. Were the defense attorney's statements proper? a. Yes, if others have already made prejudicial statements publicly, responsive statements may have the salutary effect of lessening any resulting adverse impact on the adjudicative proceeding. b. Yes, because the First Amendment and Sixth Amendment protect a defendant's right to defend himself publicly through his attorney against false accusations. c. No, there is a presumption of prejudicial effect on the proceedings when a lawyer comments publicly about the performance or results of any examination or test or the refusal or failure of a person to submit to an examination or test. d. No, such responsive statements should contain only such information as is necessary to mitigate undue prejudice created by the statements made by others.

d. No, such responsive statements should contain only such information as is necessary to mitigate undue prejudice created by the statements made by others.

Disclosing adverse legal authority. While conducting research on a litigation matter, an attorney finds a very new case from the highest court in his jurisdiction that is directly adverse to his client's legal position in the case. The opposing party did not mention the case in its briefs, and the attorney realizes that the opposing party's lawyer has been recycling his firm's briefs for this type of case for several years without updating his research. Does the attorney have an ethical duty to disclose the unfavorable binding precedent to the court? a. No, because it is the other lawyer's duty to find the cases favorable to his own side, so providing the research to the opposing side would be facilitating the other lawyer's neglect of diligent representation. b. No, because it would be a breach of the attorney's duty of loyalty to his own client to disclose a case unnecessarily that undermines their position. c. Yes, because it is very common for litigators to recycle their briefs for years at a time, and everyone should help each other out with updating their legal research on issues that arise frequently in that area of litigation. d. Yes, because a lawyer must disclose to the tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel.

d. Yes, because a lawyer must disclose to the tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel.

One time thing. In anticipation of a hearing before a federal agency in Washington, D.C., an attorney travels to a Washington suburb in Virginia from her own state to meet with her client (from her home state), interview witnesses, and review relevant documents. The attorney makes weekly trips there over the course of a year and spends most of her workweek there each time (four or five days), as the agency hearing pertains to a complex antitrust matter. The attorney solicits no new clients there. She works only on the matter for the client from her home state but is nonetheless unlicensed in Virginia. Is the attorney's conduct proper? a. Yes, the rules pertaining to unauthorized practice of law do not apply to any federal agency hearings. b. No, because her activity there continued for a full year, and therefore is not "temporary," so she is engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. c. No, because she is spending more time there than in her home state where she holds a license, despite this being a temporary arrangement. d. Yes, because a lawyer rendering services in a foreign jurisdiction on a temporary basis does not violate the rules merely by engaging in conduct in anticipation of a proceeding or hearing in a jurisdiction in which the lawyer is authorized to practice law.

d. Yes, because a lawyer rendering services in a foreign jurisdiction on a temporary basis does not violate the rules merely by engaging in conduct in anticipation of a proceeding or hearing in a jurisdiction in which the lawyer is authorized to practice law.

Making a scene. A client is struggling through a deposition, during which opposing counsel is subjecting him to intense questioning. The attorney, who represents the client, tries objecting a few times in order to break the opposing counsel's momentum, but it was to no avail. The attorney then stood up, shouted, and with a heave overturned the conference table around which the lawyers, court reporter, and deponent were sitting. Notes, cell phones, and open briefcases flew across the room, and the stenographer's equipment tumbled to the floor. The attorney and the client gathered their things and stormed out of the room. A few days later, the attorney called opposing counsel and halfheartedly apologized, and agreed to reschedule the deposition if opposing counsel would agree to behave himself this time. Opposing counsel reported the attorney to the state bar disciplinary authority. Could the attorney be subject to discipline for the way in which he disrupted the deposition? a. No, because the disruption was merely at a deposition, which is not as formal as a trial or hearing. b. No, because his response was appropriate given the aggressiveness of opposing counsel in the deposition. c. Yes, because the attorney did not properly apologize for his own conduct or take responsibility for his actions. d. Yes, because the duty to refrain from disruptive conduct applies to any proceeding of a tribunal, including a deposition.

d. Yes, because the duty to refrain from disruptive conduct applies to any proceeding of a tribunal, including a deposition.