Professional Responsibility Questions

Parent retains Attorney to represent Defendant, who is Parent's 16-year-old child accused of shoplifting. Because Parent is paying for his services and because Defendant is a minor, Attorney generally communicates with Parent about the proceedings, options for disposing of the case, and other case-related issues. After speaking with Parent about a plea deal that would allow Defendant to do several community service hours and have the case dismissed, Parent advises Attorney that Defendant will take the deal. Attorney contacts the prosecutor who sends the paperwork for Defendant to complete and then cancels the court appearance, advising the court that a plea deal has been reached. Are Attorney's actions proper?

(A) No, attorneys are required to continue a normal relationship with their client as much as possible, even if the client has diminished capacity.

Attorney Roberts represents Client in a civil matter. Client's case went to trial and Client lost. Client wished to appeal the matter. Attorney Roberts did not file an appeal because there was no agreement that he would handle the appeal. The period in which Client could file an appeal expired and no appeal was filed. Was Attorney Roberts's conduct proper?

(A) No, because a lawyer must discuss the possibility of an appeal prior to relinquishing responsibility for a client's case, unless there was a prior agreement about whether the lawyer would handle the appeal process

Attorney Adler represented a client, Carl, in a small lawsuit against the client's mechanic. One day, Carl asked the Adler for legal advice unrelated to the lawsuit. Carl explained that once a month, he and some friends play cards in Carl's home, and Carl wondered whether it was illegal for those playing to place small bets on the card games (the bets were typically less than fifty dollars). Attorney Adler knew of a penal code section in their state that prohibited gambling, and that a literal reading of the statute would include the type of betting that the client described. On the other hand, Attorney Adler knew that the authorities never prosecuted individuals for placing low-stakes bets on games played in private homes among friends, and that this policy of nonenforcement against games in private homes was a longstanding practice. Would it be proper for Attorney Adler to tell Carl about the nonenforcement policy and practice?

(A) Yes, a lawyer may advise a client about enforcement policy in areas of doubtful legality so long as the lawyer does not knowingly counsel or assist the client to engage in criminal or fraudulent activity.

A client and her estranged husband have lived separately for several years. The client faces charges for involvement in an armed robbery, and she retains Attorney Graves to represent her. The client's estranged husband learns about the criminal charges and looks up her attorney's information in the local court records. The husband then contacts Attorney Graves and asks to make a payment for the client's representation because he feels guilty for having left her several years before. Attorney Graves accepts payment from the client's estranged husband, without asking the client, and merely tells the client that she does not need to worry about the fees for his representation. Could Attorney Graves be subject to discipline under the conflict of interest rules?

(A) Yes, attorneys are required to obtain informed consent from the client before accepting payment from a third party. Answer A correctly reflects the rules—an attorney must obtain informed consent from the client before accepting payment from a third party, and the lawyer in this case did not do so. Thus, the lawyer could be subject to discipline under the conflict of interest rules.

Attorney Bates works as a public defender. Because the office is always under-funded, it cannot afford to hire enough staff attorneys to handle the workload. The current public defenders all carry an overload of cases. Attorney Bates feels that she is unable to provide full representation to each client, as she must conduct about seven plea-bargaining sessions for different clients per weekday. Usually she meets the clients for the first time about fifteen minutes before each plea bargain session. Each plea bargain takes about an hour, with short breaks in between. Attorney Bates strongly encourages nearly all of her clients to accept a plea bargain because taking one case to trial means that the public defender's office must turn away about two dozen indigent clients. Attorney Bates and her colleagues believe that it is better for defendants to have a little representation than none at all and that most defendants would lose at trial anyway. Does Attorney Bates have an ethical problem under the Rules of Professional Conduct?

(A) Yes, because a lawyer must control her workload so that each matter can be handled competently

Attorney Morgan handled routine legal questions and small matters for a client, including contracts and leases, and obtained necessary licenses and permits for the client's business to operate. After a legal dispute arose between the client and an outside vendor, the client contacted Attorney Morgan seeking representation. Attorney Morgan explained that she is not a litigator and referred the client to a reputable trial lawyer in that locale. The trial lawyer met with the client and agreed to provide representation for a contingent fee. The matter settled quickly. The trial lawyer then sent Attorney Morgan a small share of the contingent fee received in the case. When Attorney Morgan originally referred the case to the trial lawyer, she did not check for any conflicts of interest because she did not do any litigation work and knew she would not participate in representing the client in the matter. For purposes of current or future conflicts of interest, and for potential malpractice liability in the litigation, did an attorney-client relationship exist between Attorney Morgan and the client for the litigation matter?

(A) Yes, because a lawyer who refers a matter to another firm, and divides a fee from the matter with the other firm, has undertaken representation of the client. (If a lawyer is receiving any fee whatsoever related to the provision of legal services to a client, the lawyer has triggered an attorney-client relationship for purposes of the ethical rules, even if the lawyer does not perform any legal work on the matter)

Attorney Avery represented a defendant in a criminal case involving serious felony charges. After the defendant rejected all proffered plea bargains from the prosecutor, he insisted upon a jury trial and volunteered to testify at his trial to assert his innocence. Attorney Avery knew that it would be a strategic mistake for his client to testify, for several reasons. First, the defendant had initially confessed to the crime, but Attorney Avery managed to have the confession excluded due to a technical defect in the Miranda warnings. Avery was now worried that the otherwise excluded confession would become admissible for impeachment purposes if the client testified and presented a contradictory version of the facts. The defendant also had a long record of prior convictions involving fraud and larceny, which would otherwise be inadmissible at trial but would become admissible to impeach the defendant's credibility if he testified. Even worse, Attorney Avery had confidential information that the client committed several related crimes to those charged in the case, and the prosecutor might elicit testimony implicating the client in these additional crimes during cross-examination. The prosecutor in the case was notorious for aggressive cross-examination of witnesses at trial and even teaches special training courses to other litigators on how to conduct merciless, devastating cross-examination. Finally, the client is not very articulate; he constantly uses street slang, gratuitous profanity, and incorrect grammar when speaking. This conduct would likely alienate some jurors. Attorney Avery explained all of this to the defendant, and then reminded the defendant that he already rejected several generous plea offers and would forfeit any chance of winning at trial due to his insistence about testifying. Attorney Avery concluded by saying, "There is no way I will allow you to testify in this case; it would be malpractice on my part." The client understood this to mean that he had no choice, so he gave up. The trial went well and the jury acquitted the defendant of all charges. Would Attorney Avery be subject to discipline under these circumstances?

(A) Yes, because he spoke angrily with his client and made unnecessary references to the client's speech mannerisms, showing extreme insensitivity and disrespect; he also deprived the client of a good opportunity to explain his side of the story about all the previous cases in which he received convictions

An attorney represented a defendant who faced charges of assault causing bodily injury. The client recounted the events that led to the charges, and the attorney concluded that the client did not commit the assault. The attorney assured the client that he defeated such charges against other clients in the past. The client asked the attorney to get him the best possible plea deal and explained that he did not want to take the case to trial. The attorney contacted the district attorney, who offered a reasonable plea deal for attorney's client, but it included some jail time. The attorney immediately refused the offer and told the client that they would be going to trial because the district attorney did not offer a reasonable plea. Is the attorney subject to discipline?

(A) Yes, because lawyers must abide by client decisions regarding plea deals, regardless of the lawyer's opinion about the client's guilt or innocence

A lawyer agreed to represent Seller, who wished to sell her business to Buyer. The sale has already bogged down in protracted negotiations over purchase price, outstanding liabilities, and certain trade secrets. The lawyer also represents Buyer in unrelated litigation over child support payments after a divorce. Buyer and Seller are not litigating against each other—the lawyer represents each in wholly unrelated matters. Must the lawyer obtain informed consent from each client to undertake representation of Seller in the negotiations over the sale of the business?

(A) Yes, directly adverse conflicts can also arise in transactional matters, so a lawyer cannot represent the seller of a business in negotiations with a buyer that the lawyer represents in another matter without the informed consent of each client. Answer A is the correct answer—the lawyer has a conflict of interest here and cannot represent Seller without first obtaining informed consent, in writing, from both clients involved. If both clients are willing to consent to the representation despite the conflict, which is conceivable if the negotiations in the transaction are not overly acrimonious, then the lawyer could proceed.

Attorney Barlow was a litigator, but he mostly handled divorces and child custody disputes. On one occasion, a prospective client indicated some hesitation about hiring Attorney Barlow to represent her in her divorce and custody case, due to his high fees. Desperate to garner a new client, Attorney Barlow offered to represent her on a contingent fee basis. The client declined this offer, because she planned to settle the matter as quickly as possible, and she expected that paying fees on an hourly rate would end up being less expensive. The case did not settle quickly, however, and the client soon fired Attorney Barlow and hired another lawyer for the trial. She mentioned to her appellate lawyer that her first attorney had offered to represent her on a contingent fee basis, and now that the matter was dragging on and on, she regretted that she did not agree to that fee structure. Her new lawyer knew that contingent fees in a divorce or custody case would constitute a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct and reported Attorney Barlow to the state disciplinary authority. When disciplinary proceedings commenced, the Attorney Barlow maintained that he had not actually violated the Rules of Professional Conduct, because the client had brushed off his offer and insisted on paying an hourly fee. Even if he had attempted to violate the Rules, he argued, the client thwarted his attempt, and therefore no actual violation occurred. Is Attorney Barlow subject to discipline merely for attempting to violate an ethical rule, if the attempt never came to fruition?

(A) Yes, even an attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct would constitute professional misconduct.

A lawyer helps pro se litigants in divorce and custody matters by assisting them in completing self-help forms (court filings) for a nominal fee, giving advice, and reviewing completed forms before the litigants file the forms. To avoid misunderstandings, the lawyer first requires each pro se litigant to sign a written disclaimer providing that no attorney-client relationship exists: "I understand that Attorney ____ has no legal or ethical obligation to provide legal representation to me in this matter." Does an attorney-client relationship exist in these circumstances, even though the pro se litigant signed a form acknowledging that no legal representation will follow?

(A) Yes, even if the representation is limited in scope, the lawyer's review of court documents and provision of legal advice about pending legal proceedings constitutes the practice of law by him

Attorney Bales has her own law practices and represents criminal defendants in their trials and plea negotiations; she is a bright and energetic lawyer. Most of her clients come from court appointments to represent indigent defendants. Attorney Bales is passionate about defending the rights of indigent defendants, so she takes every case referred to her by the local courts. The volume of cases she handles, due to the number of court appointments she accepts, means that she cannot feasibly keep abreast of changes in the law, investigate and prepare cases, act promptly on behalf of clients, or even communicate effectively with each client. She strongly believes, however, that indigent defendants are better off receiving some legal help than no help at all, so she is unwilling to turn away any cases. Besides, 95% of the criminal cases in her jurisdiction result in plea agreements, which sometimes take only a few hours to negotiate and finalize. Is it permissible for Attorney Bales to continue accepting court appointments, given these facts?

(A) Yes, failing to advise a client that deportation would result from pleading guilty to the charges constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel for Sixth Amendment purposes.

Perry Mason was a criminal defense attorney. At one point, Mason represented a client facing drug charges. The client was also an undocumented immigrant—he had entered the country many years before on a tourist visa, and then overstayed his visa, never returning to his home country. The prosecutor offered the client a plea agreement that included minimal time in prison. Attorney Mason was pleasantly surprised by the plea offer, given the seriousness of the drug charges against the defendant and the fact that the charges normally carried a ten-year sentence. Mason recognized this as a much better outcome than the defendant was likely to achieve if they went to trial, so he urged his client to accept the plea agreement. The client then explained his immigration status to Mason and asked if accepting the plea bargain could result in his deportation. Immigration law was not Mason's area of specialty, but he speculated that the plea agreement would have no implications for the client's immigration status, and Mason assured him that his long tenure in the country meant that he would not face deportation. Attorney Mason was correct about their poor odds of prevailing at trial, but he was completely wrong about this; in fact, pleading guilty to these charges resulted in deportation for the client, as a matter of statutory law, after he served his sentence. The client followed the advice and faced deportation. Is the defendant likely to prevail on a claim based on ineffective assistance of counsel?

(A) Yes, failing to advise a client that deportation would result from pleading guilty to the charges constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel for Sixth Amendment purposes.

Attorney Prince is the managing partner of a twelve-lawyer firm that specializes in criminal defense work. He assigns cases to the associate lawyers, who are his subordinates, and supervises their work. In handling workload issues, he frequently must balance competing demands for scarce resources. The firm receives a steady stream of court appointments for representation of indigent defendants, and they also have a constant influx of walk-in clients seeking representation in their misdemeanor and felony cases. Attorney Prince knows that he should monitor the workload of the supervised lawyers to ensure that the workloads do not exceed a level that may be competently handled by the individual lawyers. On the other hand, Prince feels strongly that that indigent defendants are better off receiving some legal help than no help at all, so he is unwilling to turn away any clients. Given that most of the criminal cases result in plea agreements, sometimes taking only a few hours to negotiate and finalize, usually there is a diminishing marginal value in the lawyers expending time and effort on background investigation or legal research for individual cases. In addition, Prince knows that the other lawyers working as his subordinates have an ethical duty to manage their own workloads, so he feels he is not responsible to duplicate that effort. As a result, he continues to assign new cases to associates, even when they complain that they already feel overwhelmed. Is Attorney Prince subject to discipline?

(A) Yes, if a supervisor knows that a subordinate's workload renders the lawyer unable to provide competent and diligent representation and the supervisor fails to take reasonable remedial action, the supervisor himself is responsible for the subordinate's violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Attorney Saint works as a public defender and feels completely overwhelmed because of her heavy caseload. She has started to double-book two or more trials for the same day, counting on one or more of them to resolve in a plea-bargain agreement before trial. Most clients meet her for only a few minutes before their plea-bargaining session, and she emphatically insists with her clients that they accept the prosecutor's second or third offer for a deal. When her cases go to trial, she must waive voir dire entirely and often does no factual investigation or case research—yet she still wins acquittals in many cases because she is very gifted at destroying the credibility of hostile witnesses during cross-examination. It has become increasingly clear to her that she cannot meet her basic ethical obligations in representing even her existing clients—she does not have time to do competent legal research, in-depth factual investigation, or keep her clients updated about developments in their cases. Must Attorney Saint withdraw from representing some of her current clients?

(A) Yes, if she cannot fulfill her ethical duties, she must not continue representation of her current clients

Two co-plaintiffs agree to representation by the same lawyer in a civil action, and both provide written informed consent to the potential conflicts of interest. Halfway through trial, the opposing party unexpectedly makes a settlement offer that one client wants to accept. The other client wants to reject it, as he believes that a favorable jury verdict is a certainty and will be much higher. The lawyer strongly encourages them to accept the settlement offer, which he believes is generous, given his perception that their chances for a favorable jury verdict are slim. Unable to reach a consensus on whether to accept the settlement offer, one of the clients revokes his consent to the conflict of interest.

(A) Yes, the lawyer must petition the court to withdraw from representing both clients. The correct answer is A. Clients who want joint representation will usually give written consent to the potential conflicts of interest because sharing a lawyer may save money and can simplify the proceedings. Even so, each client who gives consent to a conflict of interest can revoke that consent at any time, which means the lawyer will have to withdraw from the representation of at least one, if not all, of the clients. Once a trial is underway, the lawyer must ask the court for permission to withdraw, but courts almost always grant the request. In this question, Answer A is the best answer—the lawyer will presumably have to withdraw from representing both clients. Sometimes, a lawyer may be able to withdraw from one and continue representing the other, but given the late stage of the proceedings here and the fact that one client's decision puts the other in an unfavorable position, the lawyer probably cannot represent either.

The directors of a large corporation requested that its lawyer investigate allegations of wrongdoing. During that investigation, the lawyer conducted interviews of the organization's employees and managers. The interviews revealed that the alleged wrongdoing involved only one employee, whom the corporation immediately terminated. After resolving the matter, the lawyer authored a series of blog posts about the amusing anecdotes he heard during his interviews, illustrating the petty internal politics, the low morale in certain departments, and a few of the office romances that had ended badly.

(A) Yes, when a corporation asks its lawyer to investigate an internal problem or wrongdoing, interviews made during that investigation between the lawyer and the client's employees come under the client-confidentiality rules. The correct answer is A. Comment 2 to Rule 1.13 explains that whenever "an organizational client requests its lawyer to investigate allegations of wrongdoing, interviews made in the course of that investigation between the lawyer and the client's employees or other constituents are covered by Rule 1.6." That means that the duty of confidentiality applies to corporate clients just as it would to individual clients, and the lawyer may not disclose confidential information about clients, even after the matter ends, without client consent or some other exception that would allow the disclosure.

Twenty years ago Attorney Abrams represented Husband in a transactional matter that involved incorporating a small business that Husband later sold. The proceeds from the sale went to fund college tuition for Husband's grown children. Wife recently retained Attorney Abrams to represent her in a divorce action against Husband. Husband and Wife both provided Attorney Abrams with informed consent, confirmed in writing, waiving any conflicts of interest. Husband barely remembered Abrams. In fact, the previous representation has no bearing on the current divorce or marital property. Wife then told Abrams, in confidence, that Husband had an extramarital affair the previous year, and this was a major factor in her deciding to file for divorce. She explained that it was very important to her that Husband's affair be a centerpiece in the divorce proceedings, as it would give her closure and help both her parents and her grown children to understand why she felt compelled to end the marriage. Attorney Abrams believed her, but found this allegation unsavory and did not want to embarrass Husband, especially given that Husband is a former client. Abrams halfheartedly filed the divorce petition without any mention of the affair, stipulated to Husband's request for a sealed record without discussing this move with Wife, and resolved the matter as discreetly as possible. Ultimately, Wife accepted the settlement recommended by Attorney Abrams but was deeply disappointed that the affair had been kept secret, with the result that her family would not believe her about the reasons she sought a divorce. Is Attorney Abrams's conduct proper?

(B) No, because a lawyer must act with commitment and dedication to the interests of the client and with zeal in advocacy upon the client's behalf (THIS WAS NOT ABOUT PRESSING FOR AN ADVANTAGE, RATHER, THIS WAS ABOUT ADHERING TO THE CLIENTS WISHES).

A commercial real estate developer hired an attorney to secure environmental permits to build a shopping center. The relevant federal and state agencies granted the necessary permits. The attorney's representation of the developer ended once the environmental permits were securely in hand. Nevertheless, construction of the shopping center did not begin immediately, because clearing the land exhausted the developer's initial supply of investment funds. Two years later, the developer found another investor and began preparations for the construction of the shopping center. In the meantime, the residents of the neighborhoods around the proposed shopping center had turned against the project, out of concerns for the increase in traffic and litter that it could bring to the area, as well as the flooding of adjacent yards that would result from the rainwater runoff from a new parking lot. The "Not In My Back Yard" Association (NIMBY) formed and learned that the rezoning of the property by municipal authorities to permit a shopping center was still pending, with an upcoming public hearing on the schedule. NIMBY hired the same attorney to represent the neighbors in opposing the rezoning on the basis of environmental considerations.

(B) No, because the matters are 'substantially related,' since it is likely that confidential information from the prior representation would materially advance the neighbors' position in the subsequent lawsuit, such as detailed reports about the potential environmental impact of constructing the shopping center. Thus, Answer B is the correct answer, both because of the risk of exploiting confidential information from the developer in portraying the construction as a threat to the community, and because the lawyer's advocacy in each case would probably be self-contradictory (minimizing the environmental harms to obtain the permits originally, and then emphasizing the harms in order to halt the construction for the NIMBY group)

While working for Conglomerate Corporation as in-house counsel, an attorney discovered that the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) falsified the corporation's quarterly earnings report to boost the firm's share price. Many of the top executives at Conglomerate, including the CFO, receive compensation partly in stock options. The attorney knew that these misrepresented earnings appeared in the filings to the Securities and Exchange Commission and will eventually result in severe regulatory fines or civil liability for the corporation.

(B) The attorney should start with the CFO, and then take the matter up the chain of command in the organization if necessary, eventually bringing the matter to the Board of Directors if no one in management will address the problem. Answer B is therefore the best answer—the lawyer in this situation should proceed to the person who has authority over the CFO (perhaps the CEO or president) and eventually go to the Board of Directors as a last resort.

A woman who had recently moved into town made an appointment for a consultation with an attorney at Small Firm to discuss obtaining a divorce from her husband, who was also a lawyer. When the consultation occurred, the attorney asked the woman to "tell him the whole story," that is, to explain her situation and her objectives in the representation. The attorney did not ask for a waiver of confidentiality. The woman went into considerable detail about the problems in her marriage and her motivations in seeking a divorce, and she also discussed the couple's finances and her husband's personal assets and investments. After the consultation, the woman decided not to retain this attorney because she felt his firm's fees were too high, and she hired another lawyer instead. Two weeks later, the same woman's husband, who was a lawyer working for the municipal government, wanted to hire Small Firm to represent him in the divorce proceedings. Which of the following statements is false?

(B) The attorney who conducted the consultation with the wife may indeed represent the husband, because the wife never became a client of the attorney or his firm.

Attorney Breyer has been representing a client in an adoption of an orphan from Zimbabwe. Acme Corporation subsequently hires Attorney Breyer to defend it against a defective products lawsuit brought by Victim. During the discovery phase of litigation, Victim's lawyers disclose the list of witnesses they plan to call at trial to testify on behalf of Victim against Acme. Attorney Breyer's adoption client is on Victim's witness list. The adoption client is unaware that Attorney Breyer is representing Acme Corporation. The adoption client, who is a friend of Victim, will testify about Victim's character traits of caution and care and the suffering Victim has endured since the incident with Acme's defective product. Attorney Breyer was not aware that the adoption client even knew Victim, and therefore had no previous reason to obtain consent from the adoption client, Acme Corporation, or Victim about his representation of Acme in the litigation. Will the court grant a motion to disqualify Attorney Breyer from representing Acme Corporation in the products liability case

(B) Yes, a directly adverse conflict may arise when a lawyer is required to cross-examine a client who appears as a witness in a lawsuit involving another client of the lawyer. Answer B is therefore the correct answer because the clients' interests become directly adverse when one of the clients must testify against the other at a trial in which the lawyer would be cross-examining the client-witness. Note that one of the remedies available in cases of conflicts of interest is disqualification by the tribunal. Disqualification puts the client in a difficult position of having to scramble to find a new lawyer for litigation that is already underway, and it is embarrassing for the disqualified lawyer. If the lawyer is disqualified, the client may refuse to pay the lawyer's fees, especially when the lawyer should have recognized the conflict before representation commenced.

Attorney Cabot, a partner at Big Firm, attended a networking reception. She found herself in conversation with a former law school classmate who was a managing lawyer at Boutique Firm. After a few drinks, the other lawyer started bragging about how the advantage of being managing partner at a smaller firm was that she was able to manipulate her firm's bookkeeping to understate the earnings of the firm and the salaries of the lawyers there for purposes of tax reporting. Attorney Cabot listened to this story and felt a mix of envy and disgust because it sounded lucrative but illegal. She kept the information in mind and gossiped about it to some of her friends, but she took no action to report the other lawyer to the authorities. Could Attorney Cabot be subject to discipline for not reporting this information to the state bar disciplinary authorities?

(B) Yes, a lawyer who learns of another lawyer committing tax fraud has a duty to report the ethical violation to the appropriate professional authority.

Attorney Anderson had recently taken on many new clients and was having trouble managing her time and meeting deadlines. She had not missed any deadlines in any client matter however. At one pre-trial hearing, opposing counsel asked for a one-month postponement of the previously scheduled hearing, to Attorney Anderson's great relief. Anderson readily agreed because the postponement would enable her to attend to other urgent client matters and give her more time to prepare for the hearing. Based on facts, there was no indication that postponing the hearing would prejudice the client. Anderson called her client to notify him about the trial postponement. The client was upset about the postponement because he wanted the matter resolved as quickly as possible. The client accused Attorney Anderson of putting her own scheduling needs ahead of his interests. Anderson explained that they had not lost anything through the postponement and that she would now have more time to prepare for the hearing. She suggested that the delay was probably advantageous for the client's case, both from a strategic and a preparation standpoint. The client accepted Attorney Anderson's answer but still felt disappointed that Anderson did not ask him first because he would have expressed his will to oppose the postponement. Was Attorney Anderson in compliance with her ethical duties under the Rules of Professional Conduct?

(B) Yes, a lawyer's duty to act with reasonable promptness does not preclude the lawyer from agreeing to a reasonable request for a postponement that will not prejudice the lawyer's client. (YOU DONT HAVE AN ETHICAL DUTY TO ACCOMMODATE REQUESTS, YOU CAN DENY IT)

Attorney Grimes recently moved laterally to a new firm. His previous firm represented Conglomerate Corporation, and Attorney Grimes occasionally worked on some of Conglomerate's legal matters. Attorney Grimes's new firm recently decided to represent the plaintiffs in a lawsuit against Conglomerate, and the cause of action arises from a new consumer protection statute that the state legislature passed in its last session. Attorney Grimes had left the previous firm before the new lawsuit began, and will not work on the new lawsuit at all.

(B) Yes, assuming the new firm screens Grimes from the case, and provides written notice to Conglomerate about its screening procedures, as well as periodic certifications that the firm is indeed following the screening procedures regarding Attorney Grimes. The correct answer is B. This question tests the basic rule about imputed conflicts of interest, found in Model Rule 1.10, which centers around screening an individual lawyer who has a conflict that would otherwise not involve the rest of the lawyers in the firm. Note that if the firm does not follow proper screening procedures for the attorney who has the conflict, the entire firm has a conflict and cannot proceed with representing the new client. If it proceeded anyway, the firm would then be subject to disqualification by a tribunal, or a disciplinary action by the bar, or a legal malpractice lawsuit (or all of these).

A former client sued Attorney Andrews for legal malpractice, alleging that Andrews improperly withdrew from the representation on the eve of trial, thereby harming the client. Attorney Andrews claimed in defense that her withdrawal was due to an unforeseen conflict of interest that arose after the representation was underway, and that the conflict was serious enough to compel withdrawal from the representation. The client insists that there was no real conflict of interest that could have required Attorney Andrews' abrupt withdrawal. Should a judge allow expert testimony to help persuade the factfinder that the state's ethical rules concerning conflicts of interest indeed required withdrawal?

(B) Yes, because compliance with the requirements of the ethical rules is relevant and material to the question of the attorney's malpractice, even if it is not dispositive.

Amanda was in her third and final year of law school. She applied for admission to practice law. The application forms for admission instructed applicants to list every place of employment for the previous seven years. Amanda decided to leave out the job she had for a year between college and law school, because she was embarrassed about it—she had worked for a year as a rent-a-clown for children's birthday parties. Worse, the job came to an end not because she started law school, but because the police arrived during the last party where she worked as a clown to arrest the foster care parents for ongoing child abuse. As a clown present in the home when the police and child protection services arrived, Amanda found herself under arrest, though the district attorney later dropped the charges when they realized she was merely present for a birthday party and was not part of the abuse of the foster children. At the same time, the authorities were upset that Amanda had previously performed as a clown at other birthday parties for the same foster parents, and she should have been aware that the children were suffering from abuse, but she had not reported it and continued to accept engagements to be a clown at their parties. Traumatized by the whole ordeal, Amanda could not continue working as a clown, so she took a month or two off before starting law school. Because the entire incident and the job seemed unrelated to the practice of law, she thought it was appropriate to omit it entirely from her application for admission. The state admissions authority, however, obtained her arrest record, and pieced together that she had worked as a party clown after college, though she did not include it in her employment history. She also had omitted a brief summer job during college because that employer never paid her, and the employer had gone to jail for operating a pyramid scheme. Is it proper for the state admissions authority to deny her admission for her failure to report these prior jobs?

(B) Yes, because omitting a material fact on an admissions application, such as a prior place of employment when the form instructs applicants to list every past job, violates the ethical rules and counts as a misrepresentation to the state disciplinary authorities.

An attorney represented a client in an estate planning matter. The client was showing early signs of Alzheimer's dementia: forgetfulness, abrupt changes in the conversation, and repeating the same story or information within the same consultation. At the beginning of each conversation, the client would ask the attorney to remind her of the attorney's first name and how he liked being a lawyer, though she always recognized the attorney as her legal representative. Home health aides visited the client twice a week, but otherwise the client lived alone and took care of her daily needs without incident, though she no longer drove a car. The attorney found it frustrating to discuss the more difficult legal questions in the estate plan with the client, who would frequently repeat a question twenty minutes after the attorney had given a lengthy explanation to the same question. The client's overall objectives were clear—she wanted to divide the estate equally among the surviving heirs. At some point, the attorney started to follow his own judgment about the subtler questions, such as the creation of a spendthrift trust, the liquidation of real property rather than bequeathing the title to one or more heirs, and so on. All the attorney's actions in the matter were standard practices among estate planning lawyers and were objectively competent. In fact, the attorney fulfilled the client's objectives and protected the client's interests, even though he decided not to bother the client with the details. Could the attorney be subject to discipline for following his own judgment on the practical questions of estate planning, without including the client in these decisions?

(B) Yes, lawyers have an ethical duty to maintain, as much as possible, a normal client-lawyer relationship with the client, even when the client suffers from diminished capacity.

Bonnie and Clyde are co-defendants, facing felony charges for a string of armed robberies. Attorney Abbott represents the two of them together. The District Attorney has a theory that Bonnie planned the crime and was the only one carrying a weapon, while Clyde helped collect the money during the robbery and drove the getaway car. This prompts the District Attorney to offer Clyde a plea agreement—if Clyde will plead guilty to a misdemeanor and then testify against Bonnie, he will receive a minimal amount of jail time. Attorney Abbott is loyal to both clients, so he insists that Clyde reject the District Attorney's offer. Which of the following is true regarding Attorney Abbott's ethical duties?

(C) As soon as plea negotiations involving Clyde's options started, Clyde should have had independent counsel representing him. Answer C is the best answer; the lawyer has an insurmountable conflict of interest. Conflicts of interest are one of the main ethical problems facing criminal defense lawyers, because many defendants lack financial resources to hire separate lawyers, and co-defendants often want to "share" a lawyer to save on legal fees. The facts in this Question are reminiscent of one of the illustrations in the Restatement (Third) of the Law Governing Lawyers § 129 (Conflicts of Interest in Criminal Litigation). As soon as the prosecutor began a plea negotiation with one of the co-defendants, it was foreseeable, if not inevitable, that this would involve asking one defendant to testify against the other. This immediately puts the lawyer representing the two of them in a difficult bind—it would be in the best interest of the first client to accept the deal and testify against the other defendant, so the lawyer should advise him to take the deal, but this would simultaneously harm the lawyer's other client—the other defendant. Note that unlike the Restatement, the ABA Model Rules do not have a separate section for conflicts in criminal litigation, but the same rule is part of Model Rule 1.7, and the Comment to Rule 1.7 applies the rule to both civil and criminal litigation, reaching the same result as the Restatement.

Attorney Wilson has no litigation experience because she exclusively handles business transactional work. Attorney Wilson has represented Client in a number of her business transactions. In one instance, Wilson prepared a detailed non-compete agreement for Client to use with a nationally known mathematician whom Client hired to work on Client's predictive coding algorithms. After signing the agreement and working with Client's company for a short period of time, the mathematician left Client's company and began working for Client's main business rival, apparently in violation of the non-compete agreement. Client asked Attorney Wilson to bring an enforcement action against the mathematician. Wilson declined to represent Client in the litigation. Attorney Wilson reminded Client that their previous retainer agreement pertaining to the non-compete agreement specifically stated that Wilson's representation would include only the drafting and related transactional work and would not include handling litigation to enforce or nullify the non-compete agreement. Would Attorney Wilson be subject to discipline for including this provision in her agreement to represent Client?

(C) No, because a lawyer may reasonably limit the scope of the representation, by informed agreement with the client, at the beginning of the representation

Attorney worked as in-house counsel for a petroleum refinery. One day, after weeks of stalemate in a round of collective bargaining, the refinery workers decided to go on strike to demand higher wages and more vacation time. The workers abandoned their workstations and picketed on the sidewalk in front of the refinery. Late in the evening, some of the picketers moved their protests onto the refinery compound, including some hazardous areas. The usual safety personnel were also on strike, so there was a substantial risk of an explosion at the refinery if the protestors engaged in vandalism. There was also a risk of injuries to the protestors. At midnight, the refinery's manager called Attorney to obtain guidance on hiring a private security force and having all the picketers arrested and removed from the compound. Although Attorney initially suggested that they simply remove the protestors from the hazardous areas, the manager believed that the protesters on the sidewalk would simply migrate over to the same areas to fill the gaps from those removed and then pose an ongoing safety risk. Attorney knew nothing about protester rights or the rights of striking workers. Attorney tried to call one or two lawyers he knew who might know the answer, but nobody answered his calls given the late hour. Without a basis for forming an opinion related to labor laws and dealing with strikers, Attorney advised the manager that it would be fine for the private security personnel to remove the picketers by force. Unfortunately, during an ensuing scuffle with the private security personnel, several workers and security officers were seriously injured. It turned out that Attorney's advice was incorrect given the special circumstances surrounding the collective bargaining. The refinery was subject to substantial liability both to the injured individuals and possible fines imposed by the federal labor board. Is Attorney subject to discipline?

(C) No, because in an emergency a lawyer may give advice or assistance in a matter in which the lawyer does not have the skill ordinarily required, where referral to or consultation or association with another lawyer would be impractical. However, Comment 3 to Model Rule 1.1 anticipates emergency situations in which the lawyer may give some guidance to a client immediately.

Two co-plaintiffs in a personal injury lawsuit hired Attorney Johnson to represent them in the matter. The litigation promised to become very complex, with multiple issues pertaining to liability and multiple potential defendants. Attorney Johnson had each client sign a detailed "waiver of present and future conflicts of interest" form and carefully explained the specific types of conflicts that can arise between co-plaintiffs in tort litigation, such as indemnification claims, cross-claims, adversarial positions in response to counter-claims from defendants or third-party interveners, and so on. In addition, Attorney Johnson encouraged both clients to consult with separate lawyers before consenting to the conflicts, and both did so. Moreover, both plaintiffs were themselves lawyers and were very familiar with the potential conflicts of interest that could arise from this common representation. Attorney Johnson reasonably believed that she would be able to provide competent and diligent representation to each affected client. As the trial date approached, a counter-claim by one of the defendants forced one plaintiff to file a cross-claim for indemnification against the other.

(C) No, because new circumstances materialized that make the conflict nonconsentable, namely, the assertion of a claim by one client against another client represented by the lawyer in the same litigation. This means that Answer C is the correct answer to this question—even though the lawyer validly obtained informed consent in writing from the clients to specific future conflicts of interest, the counter-claim by one client against the other rendered the lawyer's conflict of interest nonconsentable.

A lawyer agreed to represent a tenant who was facing eviction for nonpayment of rent. The lawyer formalized his representation agreement with the tenant and filed an appearance in the local housing court. The court docket had the tenant's hearing scheduled for one month later. Four days after filing his appearance, the lawyer received a phone call from the tenant saying she no longer wanted him to represent her because she wanted to represent herself instead. She conceded that he had done nothing wrong. The lawyer tried to persuade her to change her mind, but she was insistent so the lawyer said he would send her all the documents from her case. The lawyer then drafted a letter acknowledging the termination of representation and sent it along with copies of the court documents he had pertaining to the client's case. The letter was returned three days later to the lawyer, marked "UNDELIVERABLE: Not at This Address." The lawyer tried calling the client, but her phone number was no longer in service. On the date of the tenant's scheduled hearing, the lawyer appeared in person to notify the judge that the tenant had discharged him and to seek to withdraw from the case. The tenant did not appear at the hearing. The judge refused to permit the lawyer to withdraw from the case, and ordered him to proceed with the representation, because otherwise a default judgment would enter against the tenant for failure to appear. The hearing then proceeded as scheduled, in the tenant's absence, with the lawyer presenting the same defense for nonpayment of rent that he would have presented if client had not discharged him. Ultimately, the court ruled in favor of the landlord and ordered the eviction of the tenant. Was it improper for the lawyer to represent the tenant at the hearing, even after the tenant had discharged him?

(C) No, because the court refused to grant the lawyer to withdraw from the case, despite the client's attempt to discharge the lawyer (The correct answer is C. Model Rule 1.16(c) includes a provision regarding this type of scenario: "When ordered to do so by a tribunal, a lawyer shall continue representation notwithstanding good cause for terminating the representation." Judges have broad authority and discretion over the proceedings in their own courtrooms, including the lawyers who appear in their court.)

After being served with process in a personal injury action, a business owner made an appointment with Attorney Davis, a local lawyer. The business owner met with Attorney Davis and explained that she needed defense counsel for the personal injury suit. Attorney Davis explained that she only handled commercial real estate litigation and probably had too many cases pending to agree to handle another matter, especially one involving an unfamiliar type of litigation. Nevertheless, Attorney Davis said she would look into it, think it over, and let the business owner know if she could provide the representation but that she was disinclined to take the case. The business owner left the firm and notified the plaintiff's lawyers that they should direct all further communication to Attorney Davis. Has an attorney-client relationship been formed between the business owner and Attorney Davis?

(C) No, because there was no express agreement to provide any representation, and it was not reasonable for the business owner to think that Attorney Davis would represent her. (would a reasonable person believe they are being represented)

Attorney Addison was a second-year associate at Big Firm, under the direct supervision of a partner there. The partner assigned a new client matter to an associate, instructing him to draft and file a product liability lawsuit on the client's behalf against Conglomerate Corporation. As the associate proceeded to work on the matter, however, he realized that the client had no basis in law or fact for the claim. Conglomerate Corporation was not the manufacturer or seller, and the type of product came under one of several federal statutes that shield manufacturers from product liability. The associate approached the partner about his concerns, but the partner told him to file the claim anyway, because the client was a longtime client of the firm and because there was a chance that Conglomerate Corporation would offer to settle the matter quietly without contesting the claim in court, in order to save legal costs. Would it be proper for the associate to proceed as the partner instructed?

(C) No, the associate must follow the requirements of the ethical rules regardless of the directions of a client or supervisor, and the lawsuit in this case is frivolous.

An attorney previously represented a developer in securing environmental and construction permits to build an apartment building. Various government agencies granted the necessary permits. Funding shortfalls unrelated to the attorney's representation delayed the construction of the apartment building after the attorney's representation of the developer ended. Eventually the developer completed the apartment building, decided to manage the property instead of selling it, and leased 80% of the units. Three years later, one of the tenants was unable to pay rent for her unit for two consecutive months, so the property manager commenced eviction proceedings. The tenant hired the same attorney to represent her in the eviction proceedings. The apartment's owner filed a motion to have the attorney disqualified due to the substantial relationship between his previous work in securing environmental permits for the building and the present eviction action against the tenant.

(C) No, the matters are not substantially related because they do not involve the same transaction or legal dispute, and confidential information learned while obtaining construction permits prior to construction are unrelated to the nonpayment of rent by a tenant sometime later. Answer Cis the correct answer because the work of securing environmental and construction permits is not related at all to the eviction case against a tenant years later for nonpayment of rent. The result might be different if the tenant had stopped paying rent because of flooding or some environmental issue, but the question presents merely a nonpayment eviction case. The lawyer can therefore represent the tenant against the former client because the matters have no legal or factual overlap.

An attorney works as 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 corporation 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 (FCPA) and could subject the corporation to enormous fines and penalties. The attorney explains her concerns to the executive, including that the executive 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.

(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. The correct answer is C. In this question, the attorney has already taken the appropriate first step in addressing wrongdoing that could subject the organizational client to millions of dollars in fines and other penalties under federal law (the FCPA). That first step was to confront the individual wrongdoer, the executive, and try to persuade him to remedy the situation immediately—but this has proved fruitless. Model Rule 1.13, with an associated Comment, instructs lawyers in that case to proceed to the next step up the corporate chain of command.

An attorney represented a criminal defendant in a murder prosecution, in which the defendant could receive the death penalty if convicted. The attorney assiduously pursued pretrial discovery and motions to exclude prosecution evidence. Nevertheless, the defendant confessed to the murder, against the attorney's specific advice. A sense of hopelessness set in for the attorney, and he began to curtail his efforts in the representation. The situation deteriorated even further when the defendant again ignored his attorney's advice and waived his right to a jury trial, and then entered a guilty plea to all charges, including the capital murder charge. The attorney then instructed the defendant to request an advisory jury at his capital sentencing hearing, which was permissible in that jurisdiction, but the defendant again rejected the advice and opted for sentencing by the trial judge without a jury recommendation. At this point, the attorney made only token efforts to prepare for the sentencing hearing, and he gathered no evidence regarding the defendant's character or emotional state. The defendant himself argued for leniency based on his lack of prior convictions, but this proved unsuccessful, and the judge sentenced him to death. On appeal, the defendant claimed that he had received ineffective assistance of counsel. Which of the following best describes the test an appellate court would use in deciding whether to grant postconviction relief?

(C) The defendant must show that counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, using a strong presumption that counsel's conduct falls within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance, and the defendant must show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different, that is, it undermines confidence in the outcome.

Attorney represents Client in a litigation matter. Client was not present during the last pre-trial hearing at which the lawyers argued about whether certain experts on each side could testify at trial. The trial was to start the following week. At the end of the hearing, the opposing counsel asked the court to have the record sealed in the upcoming trial and to have reporters banned from the courtroom. He explained that the testimony at trial would necessarily reveal some of his client's trade secrets, and it was important to the client to keep the trial records sealed. The judge was amenable to this suggestion and asked Attorney if he had any objections. Attorney tried to call Client, but Client did not answer his phone right then. Attorney agreed to the sealing because he could not think of a compelling reason for Client to oppose the motion. The judge set the matter for a sealed-record trial. Client never returned Attorney's call, and Attorney did not explain what had transpired until they arrived at the court for the first day of trial. Client was dismayed because he had planned to use this litigation as a test case for subsequent litigation over the same type of issue, but Attorney explained that it would now be difficult to get the judge to reverse course on this point. Is Attorney subject to discipline in this case?

(C) Yes, because even when an immediate decision must be made during a hearing or trial, and the exigency of the situation may require the lawyer to act without prior consultation, the lawyer must tell the client about it as soon as possible

Attorney Allison represented a small business owner, Claire, for several years. In her professional opinion, Attorney Allison believed that Claire could validly claim a deduction on state income-tax returns for Claire's internet service charges as a business expense. Nevertheless, the Allison remembered that she had read some published reports and data suggesting that claiming such deductions increased the likelihood of a tax audit. Tax audits are often costly and time-consuming, even for clients with nothing to hide, so Claire expressed dismay upon hearing this. The next day, Claire called Attorney Allison and inquired whether there was a "safe" level of charitable deductions that taxpayers like her could claim without raising any suspicion or scrutiny. Attorney Allison had known Claire since they attended college together, and she knew that Claire never gave more than a dollar at a time to any charities. Under these circumstances, which of the following best describes Attorney Allison's proper course of conduct?

(D) Attorney Allison may properly warn Claire about the increased risk of an audit for claiming the business expense deduction, but she should not advise Claire of any known "safe" amount for claiming charitable deductions, given the reasonable likelihood that Claire plans to falsify information about charitable donations.

An attorney represented a small business client in a few transactional matters. None of the attorney's work for the client involved information about the client's finances or assets, so the attorney knew very little about the client's overall income, assets, or insurance coverage. On a wholly unrelated matter, Vick, a tort victim, approached the attorney seeking representation for a negligence lawsuit against the small business client over damage to Vick's expensive car. During the initial interview, Vick gave very few details about the accident or the scope of damages, except to identify the attorney's small business client as the intended defendant and to specify that the incident involved a scraped fender in a parking garage. The attorney believed there was no significant risk that the representation of the small business client would materially limit the attorney's responsibilities to Vick, and vice versa. Because the attorney believed there was no conflict, he did not seek consent from either party, although he mentioned to Vick that he had drafted some documents for the defendant's business, and the small business client would obviously learn about the representation of Vick when the attorney filed the lawsuit. May this attorney proceed with representing Vick in the negligence lawsuit?

(D) No, because absent consent, a lawyer may not serve as counsel in one matter against a person the lawyer represents in another matter, even when the matters are wholly unrelated Answer D provides the best answer—the attorney cannot sue one of his own clients without first obtaining informed consent in writing from both clients involved.

Attorney Francois is representing two French restaurants that are located across the street from each other. They are the only French restaurants in the area, so they compete for the same customers, and their menus, decor, and prices are very similar. Attorney Francois currently represents both restaurants, one in a dispute with its landlord, and the other in a wrongful discharge lawsuit by a former employee. The restaurants have sued each other in the past, using other lawyers. Attorney Francois had not sought consent from each client to represent its competitor, and when each client learned that Attorney Francois was representing the other, they both expressed concern. The second client eventually lost its wrongful termination lawsuit, and then sued Attorney Francois for legal malpractice, claiming that he had a conflict of interest in the representation.

(D) No, because representation of clients whose interests are only economically adverse, such as representation of competing economic enterprises in unrelated litigation, does not ordinarily constitute a conflict of interest. The correct answer is D. The fact that two clients dislike each other, or that two clients own competing businesses, does not create a conflict of interest for the lawyer. Comment 6 to Model Rule 1.7 addresses this very point: "On the other hand, simultaneous representation in unrelated matters of clients whose interests are only economically adverse, such as representation of competing economic enterprises in unrelated litigation, does not ordinarily constitute a conflict of interest and thus may not require consent of the respective clients." Of course, if one client pressures a lawyer to provide less zealous representation to the other, this could create a material limitation on the attorney's ability to represent both, which would then trigger the conflicts prohibition in Rule 1.7—no such facts exist here. Some clients may choose to use a different lawyer than their main business rival, but without a clear conflict of interest, the lawyer does not have to notify either client that he represents the other.

Clint is a convicted felon serving a 30-year sentence in prison. Clint discharged the lawyer who lost his criminal trial and recently hired Attorney Bates to handle his appeal in federal circuit court. Attorney Bates has filed a preliminary notice of appeal, but briefs in the appeal are not due for several months and oral argument will not occur until two or three months thereafter. Yesterday, Attorney Bates received court appointments to handle last-minute appeals in three high-profile death penalty cases in which the executions are on the schedule for the next few weeks. Attorney Bates also took on a complex class action suit by prisoners against the state Department of Corrections, which if successful would pay Attorney Bates several million dollars in statutory legal fees. Given the urgency of the death penalty cases and the potential fees from the class action suit, Attorney Bates decides to transfer Clint's appeal of his life sentence to another competent lawyer, who is glad to take on the case. Clint refused to grant Attorney Bates permission to withdraw as counsel, though. Attorney Bates then mailed a letter to Clint explaining that he was withdrawing from the case, included all documents and papers relating to the representation, and filed a motion to withdraw in the appellate court. Did Bates violate the ethical rules by attempting to withdraw from the case over his client's objection?

(D) No, because the withdrawal of representation in this case presents no material adverse effect on the interests of the client

A manufacturer produces the latest technology in magnetic-resonance imaging machines for medical diagnostics in hospitals. Each machine sells for almost one million dollars apiece. Three years ago, the manufacturer hired an attorney to draft a Purchase and Sale Contract for the manufacturer to use whenever it sells one of the devices to a hospital. The attorney's representation ended after drafting this model contract, and the attorney has done no legal work for the manufacturer since. Recently, St. Luke's Hospital hired the same attorney to handle a dispute with the manufacturer of one of its high-end diagnostic machines. The attorney quickly learned that the faulty device is one of his former client's magnetic-resonance imaging machines, and that the hospital administrator consummated the purchase by signing one of the contacts that the attorney himself had drafted. St. Luke's Hospital now merely seeks to rescind the contract and return the machine for a full refund; the hospital has not yet incurred damages due to the faulty machine, but the device is unusable and was very expensive.

(D) No, because under the Rules of Professional Conduct, a lawyer cannot seek to rescind on behalf of a new client a contract drafted on behalf of the former client. Answer D is therefore correct and reflects the statement made in Comment 1 to Model Rule 1.9—the lawyer cannot represent the hospital in seeking rescission of the lawyer's own contract, drafted for the earlier client (the manufacturer).

An attorney is representing a class of plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit over lethal effects of a popular herbal supplement. The class action will have one named plaintiff and approximately 2,000 unnamed plaintiffs. After the class action lawsuit is underway, the same attorney has an opportunity to represent another plaintiff in a personal injury case over an incident at a sporting event, and the defendant is one of the unnamed members of the class action lawsuit over herbal supplements.

(D) No, because when a lawyer represents a class of plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit, unnamed members of the class are not clients of the lawyer for purposes of conflicts rules; it is unnecessary to obtain a class member's consent. Answer D is correct—the lawyer here does not need to obtain consent before suing someone who happens to be an unnamed member of a class that the lawyer represents in separate class action litigation. As Comment 25 notes, "the lawyer does not typically need to get the consent of such a person before representing a client suing the person in an unrelated matter. Similarly, a lawyer seeking to represent an opponent in a class action does not typically need the consent of an unnamed member of the class whom the lawyer represents in an unrelated matter."

A client hired Attorney Andrews to handle several real estate transactions. Once the representation was underway, the client explained that the transactions are all part of a money laundering scheme and that the money ultimately is being used to fund terrorist activities. May Attorney Andrews continue with the representation, if each individual transaction appears to be technically legal?

(D) No, if Attorney Andrews's services are being used to assist the client in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent (The correct answer is D. ABA Model Rule 1.2(d) prohibits a lawyer from assisting a client in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent. If the lawyer learns that the lawyer's services are assisting the client in such conduct, ABA Model Rule 1.16 requires the lawyer to withdraw from the representation because continued representation would violate Rule 1.2(d). Lawyers cannot excuse their participation in crimes or fraud by saying that they were merely doing what the client wanted. For this reason, Answer D is the best answer. Even though the individual transactions appear to be legal, the transactions are (by the client's own admission) part of an overall criminal enterprise. If the lawyer does not withdraw immediately from the representation, he could face both disciplinary action for violating the ethical rules of his profession and criminal charges as an accessory.)

While serving as in-house counsel for a corporation, an attorney discovered that a regional manager had taken several actions that potentially violated state and federal laws. The manager had a reputation for being arrogant and unreasonable, though he was exceptional in his area of expertise and was an asset to the company, despite his unpleasant demeanor. The attorney had clashed with him a few times in the past, and now they were barely on speaking terms. The attorney summoned the nerve to confront the manager about the wrongdoing. The regional manager's initial response was to be dismissive, saying that he was unaware of any laws or regulations that he might have violated. The attorney walked away from the conversation discouraged and planned to take the matter up with the corporate officers, and perhaps the Board of Directors. Before doing so, he reconsidered and returned to the manager and patiently explained to him the relevant laws and regulations that the manager had violated. The manager begrudgingly accepted the attorney's advice and took all necessary measures to rectify the wrongdoing and prevent any long-term repercussions. The manager also insulted the attorney, called him incompetent for not bringing up the matter earlier, and suggested that the attorney's incompetence was due to the attorney's ethnic background.

(D) No, if the circumstances involve a manager's misunderstanding of law and subsequent acceptance of the lawyer's advice, the lawyer may reasonably conclude that the best interest of the organization does not require that the matter be referred to higher authority. The correct answer is D. Comment 4 to Rule 1.13 observes that when a lawyer discovers illegal actions by someone in the corporation (the corporate client), ordinarily this will require referral to a higher authority. Even so, in some circumstances the lawyer can ask the wrongdoer to reconsider the matter, and if this approach proves successful, then the lawyer may not need to escalate the matter to protect the best interests of the corporate client. In other words, a lawyer does not have an ethical obligation to escalate a matter if the person responsible for the incident is amenable (perhaps with some persuading) to rectifying the problem and resolving the issue.

An attorney specializes in intellectual property law, representing both inventors and venture capitalists in tech startup businesses. Even though the attorney represents only one or the other side in each transaction, she may represent an inventor in one contract with a venture capitalist and represent that venture capitalist in drafting agreements with other inventors. The attorney has drafted a standardized "waiver of future conflicts" form that she asks all clients to sign along with their retainer agreement at the beginning of representation. The waiver of conflicts form explicitly consents to representation despite any and all conflicts of interest that might arise regarding the attorney's past, present, or future clients. When an actual conflict of interest or adverse relationship exists between clients at the outset of representation, she carefully explains the situation to new clients and encourages them to seek advice from other counsel about signing the waiver. When no present conflicts are apparent, but only hypothetical potential conflicts are at issue, the attorney merely says that the form is for hypothetical, potential conflicts of interest that probably will not arise in the current transaction. Is this attorney's standardized "waiver of future conflicts," when signed by new clients, likely to be effective in this situation?

(D) No, if the consent is general and open-ended, then the consent ordinarily will be ineffective, because it is not reasonably likely that the client will have understood the material risks involved The correct answer is D. Comment 22 to Model Rule 1.7 gives guidance about asking clients to consent in advance to future conflicts of interest. The bottom line is that waivers of future conflicts are more likely to be effective when they describe specific foreseeable conflicts so that the client could reasonably understand what is at stake. 'Effective' consent means that when the lawyer's actions later come under scrutiny, perhaps through a motion for disqualification or a legal malpractice lawsuit, it will validate the lawyer's decision to proceed with the representation even after the conflict arose. Comment 22 adds this cautionary note: "If the consent is general and open-ended, then the consent ordinarily will be ineffective, because it is not reasonably likely that the client will have understood the material risks involved."

Client is a second-year law student at a state law school. Client's Professional Responsibility professor forbids the use of the Internet by students during class sections. The school's student handbook also strictly forbids use of the school's wireless computer network, which provides the only Internet access inside the building, during class sessions unless the professor permits it. Client visited a social networking site during a class session, and when the professor discovered it, he had the student arrested for violating the state's Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which imposes civil and criminal penalties for unauthorized use of a government computer network. Client hired Attorney Jones to represent him. Attorney Jones is shocked that the police and prosecutor are involved in such a ridiculous case and is reasonably certain a judge would dismiss the charges before trial. The prosecutor called Attorney Jones and explained that the district attorney regards this as an important test case and wants to bring it to trial, but they will offer a plea bargain of only twenty years in prison if the student will plead guilty and accept responsibility. Attorney Jones blurted out a profanity and hung up on the prosecutor. He did not mention the offer to Client, out of fear that it would upset him, and instead drafted a motion to dismiss. The court granted the motion and dismissed the charges against Client. Is Attorney Jones subject to discipline?

(D) Yes, because a defense lawyer who receives a proffered plea bargain in a criminal case must promptly inform the client of its substance, unless the client has previously told the lawyer to accept or to reject the offer

Jane is a law student applying for admission to the bar. On her bar application, Jane did not tell the truth in response to a question about whether she had ever been arrested. Jane, in fact, was arrested last year for shoplifting, but she was never prosecuted. Jane knew that she did not report the correct information on her bar application. Under Rule 8.1 of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct—the rule that addresses bar admission—can Jane disciplined for making this false statement?

B. Yes, if Jane knowingly made a false statement of material fact. (The correct answer is B. Jane can be disciplined under Model Rule of Professional Conduct 8.1 as an applicant for the bar if her false statement is material to the bar admissions process. What is "material" is a falsehood that can inhibit the bar's ability to determine Jane's fitness or character. Here, Jane knew she falsely answered a direct question about a fact of her history. The only issue is whether that fact is material to her application. If it is, then Jane can be disciplined.)

Larry Lawyer, a licensed attorney, represents law students who are having difficulty with the bar admissions process. Recently, Sam Student came to him and asked whether he should disclose on his application for admission that he has a prior criminal conviction for financial fraud. As part of his representation of Sam, Larry correctly and confidentially advised Sam that he must disclose the conviction on his application. After the representation had ended, Larry hired Sam to be a law clerk in his firm. Larry recently received a letter from the Bar stating that Sam had listed Larry as an employment reference. The Bar asked Larry to fill out a form that included the question: "To your knowledge, has the applicant ever been convicted of a crime?" Larry wrote, "Yes. Sam has a prior criminal conviction for financial fraud."Under Model Rule of Professional Conduct 8.1—the rule that addresses bar admission—was Larry required to disclose this information on the form?

C. No because Larry learned the information during a confidential conversation with Sam, who was his client at the time. (C is correct because the facts establish a lawyer-client relationship between Larry and Sam, and Larry learned this information in that context. Accordingly, MRPC 8.1 (b) and cmt. 3 say that Larry is subject to 1.6 restrictions; under 1.6, Larry cannot reveal information related to the representation without Sam's consent. The fact that representation had ended is irrelevant;)

Alexander Associate and Amanda Associate are second-year associates working under the supervision of Mike, a mid-level associate, on a commercial real estate closing. On Monday, Mike directed Alexander to complete some time-sensitive documents by Friday, the day set for the real estate closing, and Mike's assistant put the deadline in Alexander's, Amanda's, and Mike's calendars. Alexander, however, forgot about the task, and the documents remained incomplete on Thursday. Amanda discovered that Alexander had forgotten his duties, so, on Thursday night, she pulled an all-nighter and completed the documents, which she placed on Mike's desk on Friday morning, as scheduled. Assume that Alexander's failure to complete the documents was a breach of his ethical obligation of diligence under the Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Under Rule 5.1 of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct—the rule that describes the responsibilities of supervisory lawyers--which of the following is true?

If Mike had known about Alexander's lack of diligence before the deadline, he would have had an obligation to take reasonable remedial action to meet the deadline. (D is the correct answer. Under MRPC 5.1, if Mike, as the supervisor, had known about Alexander's poor performance in time to do something to remedy it, he would have needed to do so.)

Under Rule 8.3 of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct,--the rule about reporting professional misconduct—which of the following instances of ethical misconduct of Lawyer B must Lawyer A report to the bar, assuming no exceptions apply?

None. (This is a challenging question. E is the correct answer. Under MRPC 8.3, misconduct that must be reported is only misconduct that "raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects." A, B, and C do not articulate the correct standard.)

Attorney Gibbons represents a client before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) in a regulatory enforcement matter. The ALJ orders Attorney Gibbons to disclose whether the client had received legal counsel about the regulatory requirements in question before the violation occurred. The client forbids Attorney Gibbons to answer the question. Attorney Gibbons can think of three arguments he might use to persuade the ALJ that the disclosure order is inappropriate: that the ALJ lacks statutory authority to make such orders, that the information is not relevant to the proceeding, and that attorney-client privilege applies. Each of these arguments is weak and unlikely to prevail, but they are not completely frivolous. Should Attorney Gibbons object and try to assert these defenses against disclosure, even though they are unlikely to succeed?

The correct answer is A. Comment 15 to Rule 1.6 adds an important qualification to the specific exception set forth in Model Rule 1.6(b)(6), which authorizes lawyers to disclosure confidential client information when ordered to do so by a tribunal. The qualification is that the lawyer should first try raising any available objections, as long as they are not completely frivolous, before providing the information to the tribunal. Even though the lawyer will ultimately have to obey the order from a court or ALJ, it is worth lodging the objections in case there is any chance that the tribunal will change its mind.

Suzanne hired Attorney Zigler to represent her in a divorce proceeding and custody battle over Suzanne's children. At one point, Suzanne explained to Attorney Zigler that if she loses custody of the children to her estranged spouse, she has detailed plans to murder the spouse and make it look like a suicide so that she can regain custody of her children. Attorney Zigler believes that Suzanne could plausibly carry out this plan successfully, and Attorney Zigler is reasonably certain that Suzanne will indeed lose custody of the children in the current proceeding. May Attorney Zigler immediately warn the estranged spouse, the tribunal, or the police about Suzanne's plan?

The correct answer is A. Comment 16 to Model Rule 1.6 adds an important clarification about how lawyers should approach exceptional situations, that is, cases in which one of Rule 1.6's specific exceptions to the duty of confidentiality could apply. If possible, the Comment explains that the lawyer should first try to persuade the client to make the disclosure in question, or at least authorize the lawyer to do so (for example, to save a life or to prevent financial injury to another party). Of course, clients will often refuse, in which case the lawyer can invoke the applicable exception and make the necessary disclosure, over the client's objection. The point is that clients should first have the chance to do the right thing in the situation, and if the client agrees, it avoids any conflict between the lawyer and the client over the matter.

Attorney Simpson represents several clients in various matters before the Federal Trade Commission. In one proceeding involving one of Attorney Simpson's clients, the FTC adopts a new interpretation of a recently enacted statute about unfair trade practices, and this becomes the rule of the case. Attorney Simpson has some new clients who are at the beginning stages of an FTC inquiry of their business pertaining to the requirements of the unfair trade practices statute. Without mentioning the identity of the other client or the exact nature of the proceedings, Attorney Simpson informs the new clients that the FTC has just adopted a particular interpretation that could be very favorable to the new clients in their interactions with the agency, as long as the clients conduct certain internal audits and recordkeeping. Could Attorney Simpson be subject to discipline for sharing with new clients this information he learned during the representation of the other client?

The correct answer is A. Model Rule 1.8(b) prohibits lawyers from using a client's confidential information in a way that harms that client, including giving the information to other clients to help them. Comment 5 to Rule 1.8, however, adds an important qualification that students might overlook—the lawyer violates the rule only if the use of the information somehow harms the original client in the situation. On the other hand, many instances of representation provide a valuable learning experience for the lawyer that enriches the lawyer's knowledge of the law or of legal practice. As lawyers gain experience through representing many clients, their knowledge base grows and they provide future clients with representation that is more effective and more efficient (the lawyer may not have to research a legal question whose answer she already knows from a previous case, for example).

A client paid his legal fees to his attorney in cash. The total fees were $11,100, and the client paid the attorney in bundles of twenty-dollar bills. The Internal Revenue Code 26 U.S.C. § 6050 requires that lawyers disclose, through Form 8300, the identities of clients, amounts, and payment dates of all cash fees in excess of $10,000. The client had forbidden the attorney to disclose the information to the IRS. Must the attorney disclose on the Form 8300 the client's name, the amount, and the dates of payment?

The correct answer is A. Rule 1.6(b)(6) provides another of the narrow exceptions to the confidentiality rule—lawyers can make disclosures of otherwise confidential information to comply "with other law," which includes state and federal statutes as well as regulatory requirements. Comment 12 to Model Rule 1.6 adds that other laws may supersede the ethical requirements of Rule 1.6, and the tax code provision in this problem explicitly requires lawyers to make the delineated disclosures. The federal tax code supersedes Rule 1.6, so the lawyer must make the disclosures or else withdraw from the representation before filing anything.

An attorney represents a wealthy executive in a divorce case. In the course of the representation, the attorney learns that the client intends to purchase and develop several parcels of land in an undeveloped area on the outskirts of the city. It happens that the attorney also represents a physician in an estate planning matter. The attorney and the physician have a longstanding relationship, so the attorney mentions something to the physician about the parcels of land that are for sale on the outskirts of the city, which another client brought to the attorney's attention. The attorney recommends that the physician also try to buy one of the parcels of land as an investment for the estate, knowing that the area will soon see development and the property values will increase. Even in the short term, the attorney knows that the physician could probably make a quick profit by buying a parcel and selling it to the other client when that client gets around to purchasing the parcels. The attorney did not mention to the physician that his other client was the individual planning to purchase and develop the parcels. Would the attorney be subject to discipline for giving the physician this offhand tip?

The correct answer is B. Model Rule 1.8(b) proscribes, "A lawyer shall not use information relating to representation of a client to the disadvantage of the client unless the client gives informed consent, except as permitted or required by these Rules." Lawyers often learn valuable information from clients that would enable other clients to make lucrative investment decisions, but disclosure of such information could be harmful to the client from whom the lawyer learned it, as when prices go up due to other clients acting on the lawyer's disclosures of the confidential information (the lawyer's investment tips).

Freemore hired Attorney Costle to provide the legal services necessary to set up her professional business. Subsequently, a dispute arose between Freemore and Attorney Costle over the fees, and the fee dispute turned into litigation. To support his claims and defenses in the fee dispute, Costle had to disclose to the tribunal exactly what he did for Freemore and the complexity of the issues involved, which necessarily involved the disclosure of confidential information. Was it proper for Attorney Costle to disclose this confidential information about Freemore merely to prevail in a fee dispute?

The correct answer is B. This question tests the exception contained in Rule 1.6(b)(5)—lawyers may disclose otherwise confidential client information "to establish a claim or defense on behalf of the lawyer in a controversy between the lawyer and the client ... or to respond to allegations in any proceeding concerning the lawyer's representation of the client." This exception to the confidentiality requirement is important because fee disputes between clients and lawyers are common, and the lawyer needs to provide evidence about the time and effort spent on the client's matter, and the nature of the lawyer's activities behind the scenes, even if this information would normally be confidential. The exception also covers lawyers defending themselves in legal malpractice suits by clients or disciplinary actions by the bar.

A lawyer represents Mr. Sharp in several contract dispute cases regarding services for which Sharp was paid but he did not provide. The local district attorney's office indicted Sharp on offenses related to a fraudulent investment scheme he ran. Sharp retained the same lawyer he used for the contract disputes to represent him in his criminal case as well. Sharp confided to the lawyer that he solicited and accepted money from a Ms. Mayfield, a 75-year-old widow, for a financial investment company that did not exist. Sharp explained that his construction business ran into financial troubles and he used this scheme to obtain money to pay his construction company's expenses but that he did not plan to do this again. What may the lawyer do in this situation?

The correct answer is C. Rule 1.6 contains a basic requirement that lawyers should not disclose confidential information related to the representation of a client. The rule also contains two commonsense qualifications (client consent and implied authorization) and some specific exceptions, but the basic confidentiality requirement applies to most information, most of the time. The facts in this problem may seem complicated at first because there are separate matters involved—the same lawyer represents the client for civil matters and a criminal case—but the rule application here is straightforward

Attorney Ellsberg represents a chemical manufacturer. A regional vice president recently informed Attorney Ellsberg that there was a chemical spill that released hundreds of gallons of toxic substances into a stream that ran into the town's nearby water supply reservoir. The spill occurred because a newly hired employee turned the wrong valve during a training exercise at the plant. Attorney Ellsberg explained that the corporation could face civil liability in either tort actions or regulatory actions by governmental entities at the state and federal levels and urged the vice president to report the spill immediately, if it was still unreported. The vice president replied that the company could not afford the negative publicity and the impact it would have on its share price. He reminded Attorney Ellsberg that the upper management of the company received most of its compensation in the form of preferred stocks and options, so it seemed unfair to penalize them through a loss in share price. Attorney Ellsberg explained that he would have to withdraw from representation and would report the incident to the necessary public health officials, which he did, despite the vice president insisting that this was confidential information. Did Attorney Ellsberg violate his ethical duty of confidentiality to the client?

The correct answer is C. ABA Model Rule 1.6(b)(1) includes an important exception to the confidentiality rule: "to prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm." Comment 6 to Rule 1.6 offers an example reminiscent to the facts in this question—a lawyer whose client had polluted a local water supply—though this question adds a substantial number of additional details. Note that lawyers should first try to persuade the client to do the right thing (that is, make the necessary disclosure, authorize the lawyer to make the disclosure, or take action to eliminate the danger). The lawyer in this question did so.

Attorney is handling a case for Client, and Client instructs Attorney 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, Attorney consults with another attorney in his firm about the case. Attorney tells the other attorney that Client would prefer that other attorneys in the firm not be involved in the case. Attorney uses the information and guidance provided by the other attorney to achieve a successful outcome for the client at the hearing. Are Attorney's actions proper?

The correct answer is C. Comment 5 to Model Rule 1.6 adds an important (but also obvious) qualification to the confidentiality requirement—lawyers normally may discuss client matters with other lawyers in their firm. Discussing a matter within the firm does not usually result in any outside disclosure of the client's confidential information because all the lawyers share a duty to prevent disclosure of the information to anyone outside the firm. In addition, such discussions enhance the quality of the lawyers' representation (more experienced lawyers can share their expertise), avoids inadvertent mistakes by a lawyer acting alone, and is necessary to identify conflicts of interest that may emerge even after the representation is underway. Nevertheless, Comment 5 includes an exception to this qualification—if a client expressly instructs a lawyer not to discuss the matter with other lawyers in a firm, the lawyer should honor the client's wishes. This is an infrequent occurrence but still an important provision of the rule.

Client Williams hired Attorney McKnight to represent him in a criminal matter. Williams faces charges for abducting a young girl from her home three months ago. McKnight learns from his client that Williams indeed abducted the girl, that the girl is probably still alive and hidden in a secluded location, and that the child was left alone, locked in a rural cottage, with some food and water two weeks ago when police arrested Williams. Williams refuses to disclose the location of the girl to authorities. There is a chance that someone may happen upon the cottage where the girl is trapped and help her. Does Attorney McKnight have a duty to disclose the location of the girl to authorities or the parents in order to save the girl's life?

The correct answer is C. Comments 7 and 17 for Model Rule 1.6 explain that lawyers do not have to disclose confidential information, even when the disclosure might be permissible to save someone's life, under one of the narrow exceptions to the confidentiality rule. In this question, it is ambiguous whether a disclosure by the lawyer would even fall under the exception making it permissible—it is not entirely clear whether the victim is "reasonably certain" to face death or serious bodily injury confined in a rural cottage, if she indeed has food, water, and shelter from the elements—though nobody would argue that being left alone is "safe" for a young child. Nevertheless, for the question posed, the answer is negative—even if the disclosure were indeed necessary to save the child's life (which would make it permissible for the lawyer), the lawyer is not obligated under the Model Rules to do so.

Attorney Groves was a well-known criminal defense lawyer and he agreed to represent Famoso, a celebrity who is a defendant in a high-profile murder case. Attorney Groves filed the proper notice with the court and the prosecutor's office that he was representing Famoso. Attorney Groves also filed a motion to exclude Famoso's confession that he gave to the police on the night of the murder while Famoso was somewhat intoxicated; the attorney's motion concedes the intoxication and contends that this nullifies the voluntariness of the confession for Fifth Amendment purposes. The news media learned that Groves was representing Famoso, and news commentators began to speculate that Famoso must be guilty if he hired such a notorious defense lawyer. Famoso was furious that anyone knew that he had hired a lawyer, which he claimed was confidential.

The correct answer is C. Model Rule 1.6 governs confidentiality, and the first part of the confidentiality requirements includes a qualification "unless ... the disclosure is impliedly authorized in order to carry out the representation." In addition, Comment 5 to Model Rule 1.6 says, "In some situations, for example, a lawyer may be impliedly authorized to admit a fact that cannot properly be disputed or to make a disclosure that facilitates a satisfactory conclusion to a matter." If a client retains a lawyer to defend him in litigation, this automatically implies that the lawyer will have to sign the pleadings and motions filed in court, thereby disclosing the fact that legal representation is underway. Note that if a client hired a lawyer merely to provide legal advice, without further action, even the fact that the lawyer is representing the client would be confidential information that a lawyer must safeguard.

A corporate executive hired an attorney to represent him in a criminal matter. The client faced charges over corporate fraud that he perpetrated two years before when he was the chief financial officer of a large, publicly traded corporation. The attorney learns during his interviews with the client that the fraud will have some far-reaching consequences for investors and another large corporation in the area, consequences that the prosecution and regulatory authorities have overlooked so far. The attorney realizes that if he discloses this information now, he could prevent substantial injury to the financial interests or property of innocent people and that harm is reasonably certain to result otherwise. According to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct, may the attorney disclose the information to prevent this substantial injury to the financial interests of others?

The correct answer is D. Comment 8 to Rule 1.6 explains the exception to the confidentiality rule in cases where disclosure is necessary to prevent financial harm to others. The exception does not apply to lawyers who are hired to defend clients who have already committed the crime or fraud before retaining the lawyer, even if the consequences for others are still unfolding.

A client hired a lawyer to defend him in a criminal matter involving assault charges. During the lawyer's interviews and investigation for this case, he learned that the client had also been committing identity theft and credit card fraud, obtaining credit cards in the names of other individuals and running up charges on the cards without paying the bills so that the individuals whose names are on the cards would have to pay the debts. The lawyer urged the client to stop this practice, but the client just laughed at him. The lawyer continued his representation of the client and won an acquittal on the assault charges. The representation is now over. May the lawyer warn some of the individuals in whose names the client has obtained credit cards, according to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct?

The correct answer is D. Rule 1.6(b)(2) provides one of the narrow exceptions to the general rule of client confidentiality: "... to prevent the client from committing a crime or fraud that is reasonably certain to 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." Generally, this allows lawyers to be "whistleblowers" in certain situations, such as corporate securities fraud; the exception thus attempts to eliminate tension between modern whistleblower statutes and the general duty of confidentiality. The last phrase of this exception, however, is very important—it applies only to situations in which the client is using, or has used, the lawyer's services to perpetrate the crime or fraud involved. In this question, the lawyer's representation entails defending the client against criminal assault charges—it does not appear that the client used the lawyer's services at all in his credit card fraud. Thus, the exception does not apply, making Answer D correct—the lawyer should not warn the potential victims of the client's credit card fraud, at least according to the Model Rules, because it would be an impermissible disclosure of confidential client information

Carol Client hired PB&J Attorneys at Law to represent her in a personal injury case following a car accident. Aaron Associate sat in on the meetings between Carol and Paul Partner, so Aaron knew Carol's story very well. Carol's car was rear-ended by Victoria's old Jeep. After complaining of neck pain, Carol went to the hospital from the scene, and doctors determined that she had suffered whiplash. Aaron had this information in his notes from the meetings with Carol and Paul. Paul asked Aaron to draft and file a complaint seeking damages for Carol's injuries and told Aaron to "be sure to include her two sprained wrists" as injuries. Aaron did not remember hearing that Carol had sprained her wrists, and could he could not find anything in her file about wrist injuries. Aaron told Paul, "I'm concerned about including sprained wrists as part of Carol's injuries as she did not mention that injury in the meeting, and we do not have any record a wrist injury. Are you sure you aren't thinking about another case, Paul?" Without even looking up from his papers, Paul responded, "I told you what we needed in the complaint. I want a copy of the filed complaint on my desk by the end of the day."Aaron drafted and filed a complaint that included whiplash and two sprained wrists as Carol's injuries and put a copy on Paul's desk before he left.Under Rule 5.2 of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct—the rule that describes the responsibilities of a subordinate lawyer—can Aaron be disciplined for his own conduct?

Yes, if Aaron knew that claiming the wrist injuries could not be supported by the evidence and the complaint was frivolous. (A is the correct answer. This question is based on the the example from comment 1 of MRPC 5.2: "if a subordinate filed a frivolous pleading at the direction of a supervisor, the subordinate would not be guilty of a professional violation unless the subordinate knew of the document's frivolous character.")

Attorney agreed to represent Client, a foreign national living in the United States. Client explained to Attorney 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. Attorney 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?

he correct answer is D. This question is based on ABA Formal Op. 13-463. Reporting of clients' money laundering activity is a controversial issue in the American legal profession because some international treaties suggest that lawyers in treaty countries make disclosures to expose money laundering to help in anti-terrorism and anti-trafficking enforcement. The ABA has resisted this policy for lawyers in the United States. (MONEY LAUNDERING IS CRIMINAL NOT FINANCIAL INJURY)