PR questions

A nonlawyer became an agent for a professional football player. The nonlawyer represented the player in negotiations with the football team and this included negotiating salary and recommending provision in the contract about guaranteed monies. The nonlawyer also invested the players monies in a variety of banks. The nonlawyer also uses a will form, helps the players fill out the form, and answers questions about choices in the form to make sure that they have a plan for disposition of their assets in case of death. Which one of these services is likely to subject the nonlawyer to an unauthorized practice of law claim? A) Helping the players fill out will forms and answering their questions about choices to make in the document. B) Representing players in negotiations with their teams. C) Recommending provisions in the player contract with football teams. D) Investing player monies in a variety of banks.

A) Helping the players fill out will forms and answering their questions about choices to make in the document. Correct. An agent could provide will forms to a player who moves to a new jurisdiction. However, the agent's tailored advice on how to fill out the form moves into the prohibition of authorized practice of law. Of all the activities of the agent, this one is mostly likely to subject the agent to the claim of unauthorized practice of law.

A lawyer lived next door to a law student and the two families were friends. When the law student was in high school, he was involved in an accident outside of the lawyer's house. The lawyer witnessed the accident and the lawyer saw the student arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol after a field sobriety test. The law student and the lawyer never had an attorney-client relationship in the matter. The charges were dismissed after the law student agreed to perform community service. The law student listed the lawyer on his application to the state bar as a reference, and the lawyer received a letter from the bar asking if knew whether the student had any arrests or convictions. Which response is consistent with the lawyer's duties to the bar under the Model Rules? A) The lawyer must disclose his knowledge about the law student's arrest. B) The lawyer does not need to answer the question because he did not represent the law student in the criminal matter. C) The lawyer must ask the law student for permission before disclosing the arrest. D) The lawyer may not disclose the incident because the charges ultimately were dismissed.

A) The lawyer must disclose his knowledge about the law student's arrest. Correct. Under Model Rule 8.1, a lawyer who receives a letter from the bar about an applicant must provide all information unless such information is protected by Model Rule 1.6 (client confidentiality).

A lawyer participates in a weekend pro bono program offered by a nonprofit lawyers' organization. The lawyer meets with individuals seeking information about their rights under employment law in their work for corporate organizations. As a general matter, the lawyer does not perform any conflicts checks before providing such individuals with legal information to determine whether a conflict may exist with the clients of the lawyer's law firm. The service is limited to answering questions; the lawyer does not agree to represent the clients in their employment law matter.Is it proper for the lawyer to provide answers to employment law questions without performing a conflicts check? A) Yes, as long as the lawyer does not know that the individual's questions relate to a current or former client of the firm, the lawyer may answer such questions in providing a limited legal service in the weekend clinic. B) Yes, because the lawyer does not owe a duty to individuals who ask him questions during a weekend pro bono clinic. C) No, because the lawyer cannot simply limit the representation to answering questions about employment matters. The lawyer must ascertain whether the individual should pursu

A) Yes, as long as the lawyer does not know that the individual's questions relate to a current or former client of the firm, the lawyer may answer such questions in providing a limited legal service in the weekend clinic. Correct. Under Model Rule 6.5, the ABA permits lawyers to enter into a limited legal services engagement to answer basic questions at a program sponsored by a court or a nonprofit organization designed to assist persons in addressing their legal problems. Unless a lawyer knows that the individual is asking information relating to a current or former client of the lawyer, no conflicts check needs to be performed.

A corporation hired a team of oil and gas lawyers licensed in State A and relocated them to State B, where significant development of oil and gas was occurring. The lawyers represented the corporation in advising executives and employees about how to structure corporate deals and about the federal corporate tax issues. None of the work involved interaction with third persons or the courts. State B had no licensure procedure for in house counsel. May the lawyers licensed in State A properly represent the corporate client in State B? A) Yes, because lawyers employed by an entity may deliver legal services to the entity. Correct. As long as the work done by the lawyers does not require in-house registration or pro hac vice admission in the case of litigation, lawyers employed by a corporate entity may provide legal services to the entity in states in which they are not licensed to practice law. See Model Rule 5.5(d)(1). B) Yes, because part of the work done by the lawyers involved federal taxation. C) No, because the lawyers did not associate with local counsel. D) No, because the lawyers engaged in unauthorized practice of law by practicing outside of the states in which they are licensed

A) Yes, because lawyers employed by an entity may deliver legal services to the entity. Correct. As long as the work done by the lawyers does not require in-house registration or pro hac vice admission in the case of litigation, lawyers employed by a corporate entity may provide legal services to the entity in states in which they are not licensed to practice law. See Model Rule 5.5(d)(1).

A newly married couple with little assets and no children asked a lawyer to draft mirror image wills. They have no specific differences in their family or personal situations. The lawyer informs the couple about the risks of a multiple client representation including implications on confidential and attorney-client privilege. The lawyer reasonably believes that the lawyer can competently and diligently represent each affected client. The clients consented and the attorney confirmed the consent in writing, but did not get the client's signatures. May the lawyer represent the couple? A) Yes, because the attorney made proper disclosure of the risks of the multiple client representation and obtained the client's informed consent, confirmed in writing. B) Yes, because attorneys can always represent couples in their wills and estates plans. C) No, because the lawyer did not get the client's signature to the consent. D) No, because attorneys can never represent two parties in a mirror image will representation.

A) Yes, because the attorney made proper disclosure of the risks of the multiple client representation and obtained the client's informed consent, confirmed in writing. Correct. Under Model Rule 1.7, if the lawyer represents multiple clients, the lawyer should obtain the client's informed consent, confirmed in writing and make a determination that the lawyer can competently and diligently represent each client. Here the lawyer made such a determination and obtained the proper consent.

A newly licensed lawyer practiced business law in a solo practice in a small community. She sought to attract clients and she developed a website inviting prospective clients seeking legal advice to contact her. The site contained information about her credentials, the location of her office, and a form for obtaining further information. The lawyer included several articles she had authored about the proper scope of employment contracts in small businesses. The site stated, "Let me help you in starting your small business or expanding your current presence in the marketplace." The website contained no warnings about what information a person should and should not send the lawyer. It did warn senders that no representation would begin until a contract was signed by the attorney and the client. One of the lawyer's existing clients was a local restaurant with several locations. One day, the lawyer received a completed form from a chef who worked at one of the client's restaurants. The email contained information about the chef's plans to leave his restaurant and break the employment contract he had with the company. The chef stated, "I have read your article about employment contracts and y

A) Yes, because the chef was a prospective client of the lawyer. Correct. By having a web site that invited the public to contact her, the lawyer assumed duties of loyalty and confidentiality to prospective clients. The lawyer will not be able to represent either party in this litigation unless they both consent. Rule 1.18, Comment 3. There can be no screening because the lawyer has a solo practice.

A personal injury lawyer represented a client injured in a car accident. The client was short on funds and the lawyer told the client to put as much money on the client's credit cards as possible. Once the case was completed, the client could pay those loans off. The lawyer settled the case for the client for $500,000. The lawyer received the proceeds, performed the accounting for costs and expenses, and notified the client about the funds. When the credit card company contacted the client because he was behind in his bills, the client told the credit card company that the lawyer had his funds. Hence, the credit card company faxed the lawyer a letter asking the lawyer to pay it directly out of any proceeds. The company did not have a lien on the litigation proceeds; it simply requested the lawyer's help to get paid more quickly. The credit card company was not a party to the litigation; it simply was the credit card the client used to pay expenses. The lawyer paid all of the client's proceeds to the client and did not hold any money to pay the credit card company.Was it proper for the lawyer to pay the client all proceeds when the credit card had requested payment? A) Yes, because the c

A) Yes, because the credit card company had no valid lien on the proceeds of the litigation. Correct. Model Rule 1.15(d) and (e) address the duties of a lawyer to received funds of a client and third person and promptly notify the parties who have an interest in the property. The rights of the credit card company under this rule depend upon whether the company has a valid state law lien against the client's judgment. Here, because the company's debt is not a lien on the proceeds of the litigation, the lawyer has no duty to withhold money for the credit card company.

A lawyer represented a criminal defendant charged with embezzlement from an employer. The prosecution was based upon the defendant's use of company equipment and the defendant had a very strong defense. The lawyer urged the client to enter a plea of not guilty but the client refused, saying that he wanted to get this case over with as soon as possible. The lawyer reasonably believed that the facts that the prosecutor could prove did not fit within the elements of the crime, but the client insisted upon entering a plea of guilty. The lawyer went along with the client's decision. Was it proper for the lawyer to go along with the client's decision to enter a plea of guilty? A) Yes, because the decision on the plea to enter is one reserved for the client to make. B) Yes, unless the lawyer had limited the scope of the representation to a situation where the client agreed not to enter a plea of guilty. C) No, because the lawyer did not competently represent the client by allowing the client to enter a plea of guilty. D) No, because the lawyer should have threatened to withdraw from the representation unless the client entered a plea of not guilty.

A) Yes, because the decision on the plea to enter is one reserved for the client to make. Correct. Model Rule 1.2(a) sets forth the concepts of a lawyer agent representing the client principal. The client as principal has the exclusive control over decisions regarding pleas in a criminal case. The lawyer had a duty to abide by the client's decision.

A managing lawyer, while litigating with a bankruptcy lawyer in the same law firm, discovered that the bankruptcy lawyer was overbilling the client, a company in bankruptcy proceedings. The billings were filed in open court in public proceedings. The court had approved the billings and the case was still under the jurisdiction of the court. The managing lawyer hired an outside accountant, at the law firm's expense, to audit the billing records and when the report was complete the lawyer reported the overbillings to the client, the bankruptcy court, and the state disciplinary authorities. The lawyer did not obtain the consent of the client to report the lawyer to the court and the disciplinary authorities. Did the lawyer's decision to report the overbilling to the court and the disciplinary authorities comply with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the information about the overbilling arose in a public bankruptcy proceeding in which the law firm submitted documents to the court approved by a judge in a pending case. B) Yes, because the lawyer as a managing lawyer had a duty to disclose all misconduct within the firm to the appropriate authorities. C) No, because the lawyer did not obtain

A) Yes, because the information about the overbilling arose in a public bankruptcy proceeding in which the law firm submitted documents to the court approved by a judge in a pending case. Correct. The key issue in this fact pattern is the fact that the overbilling occurs in publicly disclosed bankruptcy proceeding and the law firm submitted false documents to the court that were approved by the judge. Model Rule 1.6 on client confidentiality would not apply in part because the billing records were part of the public record approved by the judge and in part because Model Rule 3.3(b) would require that the firm correct the filed documents. Rule 5.1(c) requires the managing partner to take reasonable material action to remedy the other lawyer's violation.

A general counsel for a corporation discovered that outside counsel was engaged in overbilling of the corporation over a period of 5 years and to the amount of $1 million. The general counsel informed the corporate executives and they discharged the law firm after it reimbursed them all of the overbillings. The general counsel raised the possibility of reporting the outside lawyers to the state disciplinary authorities with the corporation's executives, but they believed that the corporation would be injured if this information became public. Thus, the general counsel decided not to report the overbilling to the state disciplinary authorities. Did the general counsel's decision not to report the outside lawyers overbilling to the state disciplinary authorities comply with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the information about the overbilling was confidential to the corporation and the executives had the right to decide not to reveal the information to the disciplinary authorities. B) Yes, because overbilling does not rise to the level of conduct that calls into question the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, and fitness to practice law. C) No, because the general counsel as an inside la

A) Yes, because the information about the overbilling was confidential to the corporation and the executives had the right to decide not to reveal the information to the disciplinary authorities. Correct. Model Rule 8.3 requires reporting of lawyer misconduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, and fitness as a lawyer, unless the information is protected by Model Rule 1.6. This overbilling occurred in the context of representing the entity and billing is confidential client information. The corporate executives have a right to decide whether to disclose this information to the disciplinary authorities.

A general counsel for a corporation discovered that outside counsel was engaged in overbilling of the corporation over a period of 5 years and to the amount of $1 million. The general counsel informed the corporate executives and they discharged the law firm after it reimbursed them all of the overbillings. The general counsel raised the possibility of reporting the outside lawyers to the state disciplinary authorities with the corporation's executives, but they believed that the corporation would be injured if this information became public. Thus, the general counsel decided not to report the overbilling to the state disciplinary authorities. Did the general counsel's decision not to report the outside lawyers overbilling to the state disciplinary authorities comply with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the information about the overbilling was confidential to the corporation and the executives had the right to decide not to reveal the information to the disciplinary authorities. B) Yes, because overbilling does not rise to the level of conduct that calls into question the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, and fitness to practice law. C) No, because the general counsel as an inside l

A) Yes, because the information about the overbilling was confidential to the corporation and the executives had the right to decide not to reveal the information to the disciplinary authorities.Correct. Model Rule 8.3 requires reporting of lawyer misconduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, and fitness as a lawyer, unless the information is protected by Model Rule 1.6. This overbilling occurred in the context of representing the entity and billing is confidential client information. The corporate executives have a right to decide whether to disclose this information to the disciplinary authorities.

A New York office of a law firm represented a broadcasting company bidding for radio rights from the Federal Communication while the law firm's Washington office represented another client that was bidding for the same radio rights. The New York lawyers did not communicate with the Washington lawyers and each team kept separate files. The law firm accepted the two representations because the award of the radio rights would occur at a public auction decided by a transparent government process. Before accepting the matters, each client was informed of the other representation and consented to allow the different legal team to represent the other company. The consent of each client was confirmed in a writing. But the law firm did not warn the clients to seek the advice of independent legal counsel before consenting to the conflict. The law firm reasonably believed it could competently and diligently represent each client.May one law firm represent the two companies bidding for radio waves under the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the law firm informed each client of the other representation and obtained informed consent, confirmed in writing, from the clients. B) Yes, because the matter invol

A) Yes, because the law firm informed each client of the other representation and obtained informed consent, confirmed in writing, from the clients. Correct. A law firm may represent two clients with conflicts of interests if it complies with Model Rule 1.7. Under this provision, a law firm may represent one client as long as the representation is not directly adverse to or materially limited by duties to another client. In this instance, representing two business entities bidding for the same radio license falls within both of those standards - materially limited and directly adverse. In such a case, the law firm must determine whether it can competently and diligently represent the two clients simultaneously and it must obtain informed consent, confirmed in writing, from both clients. The firm took these two steps with this conflict.

A lawyer accepted the representation of a corporation sued for wrongful discharge of an employee. The lawyer reasonably believed that several legal and factual grounds supported the client's right to fire the employee. After the lawyer filed an answer in state court, discovery was scheduled to begin. At that point, the president of the corporation began to communicate with the lawyer on a daily basis. The president indicated that he wanted the lawyer to dispute every motion and to engage in aggressive tactics with the plaintiff and her counsel. The lawyer informed the president that the facts and the law were on the corporation's side and it might be counterproductive to adopt an adversarial posture in discovery. The president stated that the lawyer should listen to his direction. Although the lawyer reasonably believed that he (the lawyer) had a right to control the means of conducting the representation, he informed the corporation that he would seek to withdraw from the representation. The lawyer informed the president that he would help the corporation find new counsel and would transfer all files to the new law firm. The president begged the lawyer to reconsider but the president re

A) Yes, because the lawyer and the client had a fundamental disagreement about the means to be used in discovery to further the client's objective. Correct. Model Rule 1.16(b)(4) gives lawyer discretion with withdraw if the client insists on action with which the lawyer has a fundamental disagreement. Model Rule 1.2(a) roughly allocate the objectives to the client and the means to the lawyer, butComment 2 to Rule 1.2 notes that such decisions are often interrelated and a subject of disagreement. Thus, when the client sought to control the means of discovery and the lawyer reasonably believed that the client's actions were unwise, the lawyer could seek permission of the court to withdraw. See Model Rule 1.16(c).

A health care lawyer wanted to leave a large law firm and join a health care boutique law firm. The lawyer approached a local firm and the managing partner was very interested in hiring the lawyer. At first, they discussed salary, but the lawyer was concerned that there might be too many conflicts of interests between his practice and that of the boutique health care firm. The large law firm and the boutique were on opposite sides of many cases. Thus, the managing partner of the boutique asked the health care lawyer to share a list of clients and general information about the representation. The partner told the lawyer not to disclose any information that was protected by the attorney-client privilege or information that could injure the clients. The health care lawyer shared the information without obtaining the clients' consent and the boutique hired the lawyer.Was the health care lawyer's disclosure of confidential information about his large law firm clients consistent with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the lawyer did not disclose information protected by the attorney client privilege or information that was adverse to the client of the big law firm. B) Yes, because the lawyer al

A) Yes, because the lawyer did not disclose information protected by the attorney client privilege or information that was adverse to the client of the big law firm. Correct. Model Rule 1.6(b)(7) authorizes lawyers who are switching firms to disclose limited confidential information as long the disclosure does not compromise the attorney client privilege or disadvantage the clients. In this instance, the lawyer met the requirements for disclosure under this provision.

A lawyer represented a client who was in financial distress. The client had asked the lawyer if one of his buildings burned down, whether the insurance company would pay the policy proceeds promptly and in what amount. The client confided in the lawyer that he had thought about arson as a way to bring some cash into the business. The client felt guilty about it and the lawyer informed him that arson was a serious crime and the chances of getting caught were high. The client assured the lawyer that he would not turn to arson and the lawyer reasonably believed that this crime was unlikely to take place. The lawyer did not take any action regarding this information and did not inform any outside party. The lawyer continued to represent the client.Was the lawyer's conduct consistent with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the lawyer did not have a reasonable belief that the client would be involved in arson. B) Yes, because the lawyer may never reveal a client's statements about a future crime or fraud. C) No, because the lawyer may disclose the possible arson to the authorities. D) No, because lawyer was required to withdraw from the representation once he learned about the client proposed i

A) Yes, because the lawyer did not have a reasonable belief that the client would be involved in arson. Correct. Model Rule 1.6(b) permits disclosure in certain circumstances when the lawyer reasonably believes that the client will be involved in a future serious crime or fraud. In this instance, the crime of arson is a serious one that could involve death or substantial bodily harm and certainly involves the possibility of harm to the financial interests of a third person. In this instance, the client convinced the lawyer that no future crime would take place and the lawyer reasonably believed no arson would occur. Thus, the lawyer's conduct in not disclosing this information to a third person and in continuing to represent the client is consistent with the Model Rules.

A lawyer was a litigation partner in a large law firm and she was also a member of a nonprofit organization, Lawyers Against Lawsuit Abuse. The organization sought to reform the law to prevent frivolous lawsuits against corporate defendants and insurance companies. A number of the lawyer's clients would benefit from reform of the law against lawsuit abuse. She worked on a draft statute that would penalize frivolous filings and she disclosed to the board of this law reform organization that her clients would be materially benefited if such a statute were passed. The lawyer did not disclose the names of the individual clients likely that would benefit from such a law. Did the lawyer comply with her ethical responsibilities in her statutory drafting for Lawyers Against Litigation Abuse that would benefit some of her clients? A) Yes, because the lawyer disclosed to the organization that her clients would be benefited if their reform were to be adopted by Congress. B) Yes, because the lawyer had first amendment rights to participate in lobbying efforts to improve the law without any disclosures to the organization. C) No, because the lawyer did not disclose the identity of specific clients t

A) Yes, because the lawyer disclosed to the organization that her clients would be benefited if their reform were to be adopted by Congress. Correct. Model Rule 6.4 permits the lawyer to join an organization involved in the reform of the law even though the actions of the organization may benefit client interests. It does impose a requirement that the lawyer disclose that fact to the organization, but the lawyer does not need to disclose the specific identity of his clients who would be benefited.

A criminal defense lawyer operated a horse riding stable with his family on his personal time. The business rarely made any income, and the lawyer often deducted the losses on his income tax return even though the law was clear that this horse riding operation fell within a category of losses the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) calls nondeductible hobby losses. The IRS audited the lawyer's tax return and found that he had repeatedly deducted losses that were routinely disallowed in the past. The audit revealed that the deductions continued after the IRS had disallowed such losses taken by the lawyer and after the IRS had warned the lawyer to stop taking the losses. The IRS assessed civil fraud penalties against the lawyer and imposed a fine of $10,000. The lawyer refused to pay the penalties and unsuccessfully challenged them in an appeal. The IRS reported the lawyer to the state lawyer disciplinary authorities. Is the lawyer subject to discipline? A) Yes, because the lawyer engaged in conduct involving civil tax fraud. B) Yes, because the lawyer did not accept his punishment; he challenged the civil penalties in an unsuccessful appeal. C) No, because the lawyer did not violate any crimi

A) Yes, because the lawyer engaged in conduct involving civil tax fraud. Correct. Under Model Rule 8.4(c), a lawyer commits professional misconduct when he engages in conduct involving fraud. A finding of civil tax fraud would subject a lawyer to discipline.

A lawyer represented a chain of restaurants sued for employment discrimination by several plaintiffs. The lawyers for the plaintiffs were in court seeking to establish a trial schedule and the interaction between the lawyer for the restaurant and the plaintiffs' lawyers became heated. The defense lawyer made a comment about one of the plaintiffs that was derogatory and manifested bias based upon race and gender. The judge reprimanded the lawyer, said the comments were prejudicial, and warned him that any similar comments would subject him to contempt of court. Assuming that the judge is correct, is the lawyer subject to discipline before the state disciplinary authorities for making such a comment in representing a client? A) Yes, because the lawyer engaged in conduct that harassed one of the plaintiffs and was prejudicial to the administration of justice. B) Yes, because the interaction between the lawyer for the restaurant and the plaintiffs' lawyers became heated. C) No, because the comments occurred in the course of litigation. D) No, because the lawyer already received a reprimand from the presiding judge in the case.

A) Yes, because the lawyer engaged in conduct that harassed one of the plaintiffs and was prejudicial to the administration of justice. Correct. Under Model Rule 8.4(d), (g) and Comment [3], lawyers may not in the course of representing a client make comments that manifest bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, or other categories of protected individuals. As seen in the judge's reaction to the comments, the statements were not "legitimate advocacy" and were prejudicial to the administration of justice.

A woman rented one side of her duplex to a tenant who later refused to pay rent. The woman did not have sufficient resources to hire an attorney so she approached a lawyer for advice on how she could evict the tenant. The lawyer agreed to limit the scope of the representation to assist the woman in filing the eviction papers and educating the woman as to how she could represent herself pro se in the eviction proceedings. The lawyer explained the limited scope representation and all of the risks. The client agreed to the limitation on the scope of representation. The lawyer reasonably believed that, given the routine nature of eviction proceeding, the lawyer could educate the client on how to evict the tenant successfully. The lawyer did not inform the woman about the desirability of seeking the advice of independent legal counsel before agreeing to the limited representation. Was it proper for the lawyer to provide limited legal services to the landlord in this tenant eviction matter? A) Yes, because the lawyer explained the limitations on the scope of the representation and such limitations were reasonable in this case. B) Yes, unless the tenant had hired a lawyer in this dispute. C) N

A) Yes, because the lawyer explained the limitations on the scope of the representation and such limitations were reasonable in this case. Correct. Model Rule 1.2(c) permits attorneys to limit the scope of representation as long as the limitation is reasonable and the client gives informed consent. Tenant eviction proceedings are the type of service in which a lawyer could provide limited legal services. The lawyer could draft the complaint and inform the client as to how to file it and then how to present the case to the local court. The client gave informed consent to this reasonable limitation on the scope of legal services.

A lawyer was a tax partner in the ABC law firm and she was a member of the ABA Section of Taxation. The ABA Section often participated in efforts to reform the tax law. In one project that the lawyer did not work on, the ABA Section submitted testimony to a congressional committee supporting legislation that would penalize taxpayers who had engaged in tax shelters. Some the lawyer's clients would be affected by the legislation. The lawyer did not obtain her client's consent before becoming a member of the ABA Section. May the lawyer be a member of an organization that is seeking to reform the law in a way that would injure some of his clients? A) Yes, because the lawyer had a right to join any organization involved in the reform of the law. B) Yes, because the lawyer had first amendment rights to participate in lobbying efforts to improve the law, regardless whether they had an effect upon the interests of clients. C) No, because the organization's actions were directly in conflict with the interests of the lawyer's clients. D) No, because the lawyer did not obtain the consent of his clients to join the ABA Section of Taxation.

A) Yes, because the lawyer had a right to join any organization involved in the reform of the law. Correct. Model Rule 6.4 permits the lawyer to join an organization involved in the reform of the law even though the actions of the organization may injure client interests. It does impose some restrictions on the lawyer's work in the organization, but in this case the lawyer did not work on the legislation penalizing tax shelters.

A lawyer who was representing a client in litigation suffered a debilitating stroke that materially limited the lawyer's ability to work. The lawyer was the only litigator in a three person law firm and the case was in the middle of depositions. The lawyer informed the client that due to health reasons, the lawyer would need to withdraw from the representation immediately. The client begged the lawyer to stay on in the case to see if he would get better. The lawyer provided the client names of other attorneys who would be excellent advocates for the client. The client chose one of the proposed attorneys and, with court permission, the lawyer withdrew from the matter and transferred the case to the new counsel. Was the lawyer's withdraw from the litigation representation consistent with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the lawyer was required to withdraw when his physical condition materially impaired his ability to represent the client in litigation. B) Yes, because the lawyer had discretion whether to withdraw and obtained court permission, although the lawyer was not required to withdraw from the representation. C) No, because the lawyer sought to withdraw in a litigation matter that

A) Yes, because the lawyer was required to withdraw when his physical condition materially impaired his ability to represent the client in litigation. Correct. Model Rule 1.16(a)(1) requires a lawyer who has a physical or mental condition that "materially impairs the lawyer's ability to represent the client" to withdraw from the representation. When the lawyer's debilitating stroke materially impaired his ability to represent the client, the lawyer had to withdraw from the case.

Alpha practiced divorce law and had a reputation for zealously representing his clients in the process. A man sought to divorce his wife and met with another attorney about the representation. The man decided to hire that attorney but wanted to be sure that his wife did not hire Alpha, so the man called Alpha and met with him as a way to disqualify Alpha by creating a conflict. Alpha did not set any preconditions before he met with the man. The man provided confidential information to Alpha about his prospective employment that was more lucrative than his current job. When the man's wife approached Alpha about possible representation, Alpha said he could not represent her because the he had a conflict. When the wife informed Alpha that the man had already decided to hire the other lawyer before meeting with Alpha, Alpha accepted the representation of the wife. Alpha reasonably believed that discovery in any divorce would seek to elicit information about the couple's employment and other prospective opportunities.May Alpha represent the wife against the man in the divorce? A) Yes, because the man was not a prospective client of Alpha because he had decided to hire another lawyer. B) Yes,

A) Yes, because the man was not a prospective client of Alpha because he had decided to hire another lawyer. Correct. Model Rule 1.18 sets forth the duties owed to prospective clients. Normally, a lawyer who meets with a prospective client has a duty not to reveal confidential information and may not personally represent parties with interests adverse to the prospective client. But Comment 2 (last sentence) states that a person who communicates with a lawyer about a representation "for the purpose of disqualifying the lawyer" is not considered to be a prospective client protected by Model Rule 1.18. In this case, the man met with Alpha solely to try to disqualify Alpha from representing his wife.

A lawyer represented a large corporate client in all of its defense of employment discrimination claims by employees. The company president requested that the lawyer generally push the case along expeditiously and resist any court or plaintiff delay. At one point in the litigation, the plaintiff asked for a three-day delay to accommodate a witness' unavailability. Such delays were routinely granted by this court and counsel. The president wanted to lawyer to depose, promptly, the plaintiff's lawyer and witness as a technique to impose costs and hassle the opponents. The delay would not prejudice the company or its president. The lawyer granted the delay, although the president did not consent to the delay. Was the lawyer's refusal to follow client direction consistent with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the obligation of diligence gives the lawyer the right to agree to reasonable postponements that do not prejudice the client. B) Yes, because the lawyers always have the right to continue or postpone depositions. C) No, because no professional shortcoming is more widely resented than procrastination, and the lawyer's agreement to delay the deposition allows procrastination. D) No, beca

A) Yes, because the obligation of diligence gives the lawyer the right to agree to reasonable postponements that do not prejudice the client. Correct. Model Rule 1.3 requires that the lawyer act with reasonable diligence when representing a client. Comment 1 to this Rule states that the duty of diligence does not require a lawyer "to press for every advantage that might be realized by a client." See, in particular, Comment 3: "A lawyer's duty to act with reasonable promptness, however, does not preclude the lawyer from agreeing to a reasonable request for a postponement that will not prejudice the lawyer's client." It is true that the client could fire the lawyer or the lawyer could withdraw and the client could find other counsel, but that is not tested here. The Model Rules approve this lawyer's conduct.

A plaintiff approached a law firm to represent it in a law suit against the developer of a residential neighborhood. The law firm's client development partner met with the plaintiff and discussed the scope of the representation and the proposed cost. The law partner only obtained the information that was reasonably needed to provide the cost estimate to the plaintiff and to determine whether the law firm could accept the representation. No other lawyers in the law firm received any information from the plaintiff. The moment the partner started the conflicts check, he discovered that another lawyer in the firm was already talking to the developer in this dispute. The law firm decided to accept the representation of the developer and the partner notified the plaintiff. The plaintiff was furious and hired another law firm to represent him in the litigation. The law firm's client development partner would be screened from all confidential information and work on the developer's case and would receive no profits from that representation. When the law firm notified the plaintiff that it intended to represent the developer, the plaintiff said that she would move to disqualify the law firm.May t

A) Yes, because the plaintiff met with the client development partner, that lawyer received only the confidential information needed to determine whether to accept the matter, and that law firm will screen that lawyer from participating in the representation of the developer. Correct. Under Model Rule 1.18(d)(2), a law firm can accept a matter that is adverse to a prospective client if it screens the lawyer who met with the prospective client and that lawyer only received the confidential information that was reasonably needed to decide whether to accept the representation. Here, the law firm will screen the lawyer who limited his access to information, so the requirements of Model Rule 1.18 are met.

An elderly personal injury lawyer (Lawyer #1) represented clients as a sole practitioner in small accident cases. She had a caseload of thirty files at varying stages in the state court litigation process. Because Lawyer #1 had suffered some minor health issues, she met with attorney (Lawyer #2) in the same office building who also practiced personal injury work. Lawyer #1 explained her health situation and introduced Lawyer #2 to her office manager. Lawyer #1 asked Lawyer #2 to step in to help protect her client's interests in case she suffered a health setback. Lawyer #1 disclosed no confidential information but instead explained the manner in which she organized her files and how Lawyer #2 could quickly contact the clients of Lawyer #1 to secure consent to gain access to matters that needed immediate attention. Was Lawyer #1's involvement of Lawyer #2 consistent with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the sole practitioner established a plan for meeting her obligation of diligent representation to her clients in case of incapacity. B) Yes, because attorneys may always involve other attorneys in order to protect client interests under the Model Rules. C) No, because Lawyer #1 needed to

A) Yes, because the sole practitioner established a plan for meeting her obligation of diligent representation to her clients in case of incapacity. Correct. Model Rule 1.3 requires that lawyers perform their representations "with reasonable diligence and promptness." Comment 5 addresses the duties of a sole practitioner to anticipate possible death or incapacity that could prejudice the client's interests. This comment states that Model Rule 1.3 may require that sole practitioners prepare a plan in the case of death or incapacity. The lawyer has done so in this case without disclosing confidential information of the clients.

A transactional lawyer licensed in State A represented a local client in assembling a partnership with properties in State A, B, and C. The lawyer structured the transaction to create a State A partnership that would be marketed only to investors in State A. With disclosure and consent from the client, the lawyer associated with another attorney in State B and a third attorney in State C to assist him in properly acquiring the State B and State C properties. The client was informed of the cost of hiring the other two lawyers and the lawyer billed for the work of all lawyers together. The two other attorneys only performed work involving acquisition of properties and did not meet with the client. Is the lawyer's practice in State B and State C proper? A) Yes, because the transactional lawyer associated with attorneys in State B and State C, who actively participated in the representation. B) Yes, because the partnership was going to be marketed only to investors in State A. C) No, because the lawyer did not involve the other lawyers in all aspects of the transaction. D) No, because the attorneys in State B and C must bill the client directly for their services in State B and State C.

A) Yes, because the transactional lawyer associated with attorneys in State B and State C, who actively participated in the representation. Correct. Under Model Rule 5.5(c)(1), a lawyer may provide temporary services in a state outside that of the lawyer's licensure if the lawyer associates with local counsel. The lawyer did so in this case by hiring attorneys licensed in State B and State C who worked actively acquiring property in their respective states.

A transactional lawyer licensed in State A represented a local client in assembling a partnership with properties in State A, B, and C. The lawyer structured the transaction to create a State A partnership that would be marketed only to investors in State A. With disclosure and consent from the client, the lawyer associated with another attorney in State B and a third attorney in State C to assist him in properly acquiring the State B and State C properties. The client was informed of the cost of hiring the other two lawyers and the lawyer billed for the work of all lawyers together. The two other attorneys only performed work involving acquisition of properties and did not meet with the client. Is the lawyer's practice in State B and State C proper? A) Yes, because the transactional lawyer associated with attorneys in State B and State C, who actively participated in the representation. B) Yes, because the partnership was going to be marketed only to investors in State A. C) No, because the lawyer did not involve the other lawyers in all aspects of the transaction. D ) No, because the attorneys in State B and C must bill the client directly for their services in State B and State C.

A) Yes, because the transactional lawyer associated with attorneys in State B and State C, who actively participated in the representation. Correct. Under Model Rule 5.5(c)(1), a lawyer may provide temporary services in a state outside that of the lawyer's licensure if the lawyer associates with local counsel. The lawyer did so in this case by hiring attorneys licensed in State B and State C who worked actively acquiring property in their respective states.

A real estate lawyer was approached by a seller of a single family home and asked to represent both the buyer and the seller. The price had been set. The inspection was complete and the home passed all tests. No open issues existed other than funding the transaction and preparing the closing documents. The lawyer explained the advantages and disadvantages of having one lawyer represent both parties including the possible loss of the attorney-client privilege. The clients gave informed consent confirmed in writing and the lawyer reasonably believed that she could represent the buyer and the seller competently and diligently. The lawyer had no prior connection to the clients and the matter was unlikely to end in litigation. In this case, under the Model Rules, may one lawyer represent the buyer and the seller of the single family home? A) Yes, because under these facts the conflict had been properly managed by the lawyer and the clients gave informed consent, confirmed in writing. B) Yes, because there is no conflict in representing both the buyer and seller of real estate because the matter is a transaction and not litigation. C) No, because the lawyer did not warn the clients to seek th

A) Yes, because under these facts the conflict had been properly managed by the lawyer and the clients gave informed consent, confirmed in writing. Correct. Model Rule 1.7 addresses the conflict when a lawyer represents both buyer and seller of real estate. In a basic residential transaction, the risks are more limited than in a complex commercial transaction. The lawyer can disclose the risks and benefits and obtain the buyer and seller's consent, confirmed in writing, to the conflict of interest. And, the lawyer can determine whether the lawyer can provide competent and diligent representation to each client. If that is done, the lawyer can proceed to represent both parties as multiple clients to this transaction. The conflict was addressed properly on these facts.

A lawyer (Alpha) participated in a state bar lawyer's assistance program in which she was asked to mentor a lawyer (Beta) who had self-reported his battle with alcohol abuse. Alpha regularly met with Beta, who was under the mentorship of the assistance program in an effort to protect his clients. During the meetings, Alpha examined the status of client files and attorney work product. In one of the cases, Alpha discovered that Beta had failed to promptly deposit a payment sent to a client from a third party. Alpha corrected the error and then Alpha expanded her mentorship to include trust account management. The client was not in any way harmed by Beta's mistake. Alpha did not report the trust fund issue to the state disciplinary authorities. Did Alpha's decision not to report the trust fund issue to the state disciplinary authorities comply with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the client was not harmed by Beta's trust fund mistake. B) Yes, because Alpha learned about the trust fund mistake while she was mentoring the lawyer in conjunction with a state bar lawyer's assistance program. C) No, because the mistake was outside of the scope of the original topics on Alpha agreed to mentor t

B) Yes, because Alpha learned about the trust fund mistake while she was mentoring the lawyer in conjunction with a state bar lawyer's assistance program. Correct. Under Model Rule 8.3, a lawyer has a duty to report misconduct if it raises a substantial question about another lawyer's trustworthiness or fitness to practice law. Such reporting is not required, however, if the knowledge was obtained by a lawyer while participating in an approved lawyer's assistance program. See Model Rule 8.3(c).

A lawyer (Alpha) participated in a state bar lawyer's assistance program in which she was asked to mentor a lawyer (Beta) who had self-reported his battle with alcohol abuse. Alpha regularly met with Beta, who was under the mentorship of the assistance program in an effort to protect his clients. During the meetings, Alpha examined the status of client files and attorney work product. In one of the cases, Alpha discovered that Beta had failed to promptly deposit a payment sent to a client from a third party. Alpha corrected the error and then Alpha expanded her mentorship to include trust account management. The client was not in any way harmed by Beta's mistake. Alpha did not report the trust fund issue to the state disciplinary authorities. Did Alpha's decision not to report the trust fund issue to the state disciplinary authorities comply with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the client was not harmed by Beta's trust fund mistake. B) Yes, because Alpha learned about the trust fund mistake while she was mentoring the lawyer in conjunction with a state bar lawyer's assistance program. C No, because the mistake was outside of the scope of the original topics on Alpha agreed to mentor t

B) Yes, because Alpha learned about the trust fund mistake while she was mentoring the lawyer in conjunction with a state bar lawyer's assistance program. Correct. Under Model Rule 8.3, a lawyer has a duty to report misconduct if it raises a substantial question about another lawyer's trustworthiness or fitness to practice law. Such reporting is not required, however, if the knowledge was obtained by a lawyer while participating in an approved lawyer's assistance program. See Model Rule 8.3(c).

A client hired a lawyer to help collect insurance monies on a flooded business building. Before the lawyer had filed any forms with the insurance company, the client informed the lawyer that the client had intentionally flooded the business building in order to collect insurance funds on a building that was unsellable. That would let the client pay off the mortgage. The lawyer informed the client that she could not help the client and that this was a crime and fraud. The lawyer withdrew from the representation and the client filed the forms on their own behalf. Six months later, a prosecutor indicted the client for filing false insurance forms. The prosecutor intends to call the lawyer to testify about the client's statements on the flood and the intent to obtain insurance monies. Is it likely that the court will require the lawyer to testify about the client communications relating to the insurance fraud? A) Yes, because the client was no longer represented by the lawyer. B) Yes, because the client's communications to the lawyer were in furtherance of an ongoing and future crime and fraud. C) No, because the client communications are protected by the attorney-client privilege. D) No, b

B) Yes, because the client's communications to the lawyer were in furtherance of an ongoing and future crime and fraud. Correct. This fact pattern presents the classic crime fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege. Communications relating to legal services sought or obtained to enable the client to commit or plan to commit what the client knew or reasonably should have known to be a crime are not protected. The lawyer must testify in this case and the client has no attorney-client privilege.

A divorce lawyer had a website that provides basic information about the lawyer, her office location, and contact information (telephone number and email address). The website contained no invitation for client contact and contained no warnings about how to contact the lawyer. A man searched the internet and saw the lawyer's site and sent the lawyer by email a scanned packet of information about his situation. The attachment contained information about his assets, his family wealth, and employment. The lawyer received the email and opened it. Quickly thereafter, she determined that this man's wife had already retained the lawyer to represent her in the divorce. The lawyer sent the information back stating that she could not represent him.May the lawyer continue to represent the wife in this divorce? A) Yes, because the lawyer had a preexisting attorney-client relationship with the man's wife. B) Yes, because the communication from the man was not from a prospective client. C) No, because the lawyer received confidential information from an adversary of her client. D) No, because the lawyer did not include a warning on the website not to send confidential information to the lawyer via em

B) Yes, because the communication from the man was not from a prospective client. Correct. Model Rule 1.18 and its comments address whether this man is a prospective client. Comment 2 states that "a consultation does not occur if a person provides information to a lawyer in response to advertising that merely describes the lawyer's education, experience, areas or practice, and contact information . . . ." That person does not become a prospective client simply by unilaterally supplying with information and the law says he has no expectation that the lawyer will treat such information as confidential.

A lawyer went to a party and a stranger approached the lawyer in front of a group of guests. The stranger asked the lawyer about police tactics to discover a hit and run driver. The lawyer discussed how police investigated such crimes. The conversation was in front of the other guests, but because of the music, they could not make out every single sentence. One week later, the police have subpoenaed the lawyer to discover what that stranger had asked the lawyer about during the party. May the lawyer disclose the contents of the stranger's communication during that party? A) Yes, because the stranger did not hire the lawyer to represent their interests. B) Yes, because the communication occurred in front of other guests and therefore was not confidential. C) No, because the guests did not hear every sentence in the conversation. D) No, because the communication is protected by both the duty of confidentiality and the attorney client privilege.

B) Yes, because the communication occurred in front of other guests and therefore was not confidential. Correct. Only confidential communications with a lawyer are protected under the attorney-client privilege. If the client or prospective client makes the communication in front of other nonclient individuals, this is not protected and therefore the attorney would need to disclose it under lawful subpoena or compelled testimony.

A corporate client asked a lawyer to represent it in filing insurance claims on some damaged vehicles. The lawyer began to work on the matter when he noticed that all of the vehicles were old and not used on a daily basis. When the lawyer asked the president about how these vehicles had been damaged, the president confessed that the vehicles were not damaged in an accident. Instead, the corporation had intentionally damaged them to collect the insurance monies. The lawyer informed the client that he could not submit forms to the insurance company because the company was engaged in the crime of insurance fraud. The president ordered the lawyer to prepare the paper. "We will accept full responsibility for filing these papers." The lawyer informed the president that he had to withdraw from the representation. Was the lawyer's withdrawal from the representation consistent with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because before filing any papers with an insurance company, the lawyer was required to conduct an investigation to determine whether the client's representations were correct. B) Yes, because the corporate client was engaged in a crime and the lawyer could not assist the client in commission o

B) Yes, because the corporate client was engaged in a crime and the lawyer could not assist the client in commission of this crime. Correct. Model Rule 1.16(a)(1) requires a lawyer to withdraw from a representation when staying in the case would violate a provision of the Model Rules. Under Model Rule 1.2(d), a lawyer cannot assist a client in a crime or fraud and must inform the client of limitations on the lawyer's role in such a case. Here, the client has confessed that he wants to the lawyer to file forms based upon false information.

An elected judge who handled probate matters made it clear that lawyers who contributed to his campaign would receive preference in scheduling and expedited hearings in their representation of clients. A lawyer had a large case with many complexities and he arranged for his firm to pay $10,000 to the judge's campaign committee responsible for raising funds. Under state law, it is unlawful for a judge to make such a demand upon lawyers in the community, but the lawyer reasonably believed that he really had no choice and the contribution was needed to expedite the hearings on this particular case to competently and diligently represent his clients. Is the lawyer subject to discipline for making this campaign contribution? A) Yes, because lawyers may not make campaign contributions to judicial campaigns when they have pending cases before the judicial official. B) Yes, because the lawyer assisted the judge in conduct that violates the law. C) No, because the judge initiated the condition and the lawyer simply had no choice. D) No, because the lawyer reasonably believed that such a payment was needed to expedite his client's case.

B) Yes, because the lawyer assisted the judge in conduct that violates the law. Correct. Model Rule 8.4(d) prohibits a lawyer from assisting a judge in conduct that is a violation of the law. Canon 2 of the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct, as well as criminal law in many states, prohibits a judge from performing judicial duties based on financial gifts made by lawyers or parties who appear before them.

A lawyer represented a client who was the subject of a civil commitment proceeding that could place the client in a psychiatric institution. The client sought to contest the civil commitment and the lawyer reasonably believed that it was in the best interests of the client to do so. Under state law, the client was required to subject himself to the examination of a state psychiatrist, and that examination had taken place earlier. The lawyer also had a right to have the client examined by a medical professional chosen by the client. The lawyer received the state psychiatrist's report several hours before the client was supposed to meet with the client chosen psychiatrist. The lawyer delayed sharing the state psychiatrist's report with the client because the lawyer reasonably believed that it could cause the client to act imprudently in the examination by the client-chosen medical professional. Was the decision to delay sharing the state psychiatrist's report with the client consistent with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because in civil commitment proceedings, the lawyer may substitute his judgment for the decisions of the client. B) Yes, because the lawyer delayed in transmitting the contents

B) Yes, because the lawyer delayed in transmitting the contents of the report to avoid causing the client to act imprudently during an important medical examination. Correct. This answer is correct because it tracks an exception to the general duty of communication contained in Comment 7 to Model Rule 1.4. A prompt disclosure of the information to the client could adversely affect the client's behavior in the examination by a chosen medical professional. Thus, the lawyer had a right to withhold it to minimize the effect of the disclosure on the new evaluation.

A lawyer who specialized in patent litigation was asked to represent a client in a patent infringement case against a former client. The lawyer obtained confidential information from the prospective client in order to determine whether a conflict existed. The lawyer called an outside lawyer expert in conflicts of interest to ask for an opinion. The lawyer disclosed the confidential information of the prospective client in order to obtain legal advice on the conflict of interest. The lawyer did not obtain the consent of the prospective client for the hiring of the expert or disclosure of information to the expert.Was the lawyer's conduct consistent with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the lawyer did not owe a duty of confidentiality to the prospective client. B) Yes, because the lawyer disclosed the information in order to secure legal advice about compliance with the conflicts of interest rules. C) No, because the lawyer did not obtain the prospective client's consent to disclose the information to the outside lawyer expert. D) No, because the lawyer did not obtain the prospective client's consent to hire the outside lawyer expert.

B) Yes, because the lawyer disclosed the information in order to secure legal advice about compliance with the conflicts of interest rules. Correct. Under Model Rule 1.6(b)(4), a lawyer may disclose confidential information to secure legal advice about compliance with the conflicts of interest rules. No client or prospective client consent is required.

A personal injury lawyer accepted the representation of an injured woman who was involved in a car accident. In the attorney-client agreement and subsequently, there was no discussion whether the representation was limited to the trial or whether it included an appeal. The plaintiff's case was dismissed on the grounds of a statute of limitations defense. The lawyer informed the woman and took no further action. The woman's appeal was lost because no one filed a motion to appeal. Did the lawyer's conduct violate the Model Rules? A) Yes, because personal injury representations necessarily include a duty to appeal the case if it is unsuccessful at trial. B) Yes, because the lawyer failed to clarify whether the representation included an appeal before treating the representation as at an end. C) No, because the lawyer did not expressly agree to handle the appeal. D) No, because the lawyer promptly informed the client that the case had been dismissed on grounds of a statute of limitations defense.

B) Yes, because the lawyer failed to clarify whether the representation included an appeal before treating the representation as at an end. Correct. Under Comment 4 to Model Rule 1.3, a lawyer who has not agreed to undertake an appeal must discuss the issue of an appeal with the client before terminating the relationship with the client. That is the situation in this case and the lawyer failed to take those steps.

A lawyer is drafting a will for a 25-year-old man who was diagnosed with cancer. The man developed severe depression because of the diagnosis and confided in the lawyer that he planned to commit suicide. Suicide was not a crime in the State in which the lawyer and man lived. The lawyer asked the man to consider mental health counselling and the man refused. The lawyer asked the man to share his feelings with his parents and the man refused. The man planned to leave all of his property to his parents. Because of details provided by the man to the lawyer, the lawyer reasonably believed that the man was certain to commit suicide. Therefore, the lawyer shared this information with the man's parents who intervened to save the man's life.Was the lawyer's conduct consistent with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the lawyer owed a duty to the man's parents, his sole beneficiaries. B) Yes, because the lawyer reasonably believed that disclosure was necessary to prevent reasonably certain death. C) No, because the man refused the lawyer's suggestions that he should share his feeling with his parents. D) No, because suicide was not a crime in the state in which the man and lawyer lived.

B) Yes, because the lawyer reasonably believed that disclosure was necessary to prevent reasonably certain death. Correct. Under Model Rule 1.6(b)(1), a lawyer may disclose confidential client information reasonably necessary to prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm. Disclosure is authorized when the client intends to harm himself, not simply harm third parties. Thus, the lawyer's disclosure was permitted in this case.

A woman hired a lawyer for advice on whether she could take her share of the marital estate and flee the country. No children were involved and no court proceeding was pending. The lawyer researched the issues and informed the client that under state law she was entitled to take only her share of the assets. The client informed the lawyer that she would initially move to a cabin along the Canadian border and subsequently travel to Canada with her funds. The client in fact took all of the assets, including those belonging to her husband, and disappeared. The lawyer knows where the client is located because she called the lawyer and told him what she had done. The lawyer informed the woman that she had committed a crime and fraud against the husband. The lawyer has been contacted by the police because the client's husband obtained the woman's telephone records. The police asked the lawyer whether he knows the whereabouts of the woman client. The lawyer voluntarily disclosed the location of the woman because he reasonably believed that the disclosure would prevent or mitigate the harm to the husband's assets.Was it proper for the lawyer to disclose the location of the client under the Model

B) Yes, because the lawyer reasonably believed that disclosure would prevent or mitigate the harm to the husband's assets. Correct. Under Model Rule 1.6(b)(3), a lawyer may disclose confidentiality client information to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes is necessary to prevent or mitigate substantial financial harm to a third person. In this case, the lawyer reasonably believes that disclosure would help recover the husband's assets, so the lawyer may disclose the information under this provision. This applies even though the client's crime is past, because the lawyer gave legal advice about the conduct and the disclosure seeks to mitigate, rectify, or prevent the financial harm to the husband.

A lawyer licensed in State A represented a local corporate client that sought to file a lawsuit in State B challenging State B regulations over the corporation's supply contracts in State B. The lawyer travelled to State B to interview corporate employees in order to better prepare her case before filing the lawsuit. Once the lawyer had enough information, the lawyer filed a complaint in a court in State B and was admitted pro hac vice for this lawsuit. Is the lawyer's practice in State B proper? A) Yes, because interviewing corporate employees for purposes of litigation is not the practice of law. B) Yes, because the lawyer reasonably believed that he would become authorized to conduct the litigation in State B through a pro hac vice motion. C) No, because the lawyer did not associate with local counsel before interviewing the client employees. D) No, because the lawyer interviewed client employees before becoming admitted pro hac vice.

B) Yes, because the lawyer reasonably believed that he would become authorized to conduct the litigation in State B through a pro hac vice motion. Correct. Under Model Rule 5.5(c)(2), a lawyer may provide temporary services in a state in a litigation matter in which the lawyer is not licensed to practice law if the lawyer reasonably anticipates that the lawyer will receive permission to practice under pro hac vice authority.

A lawyer licensed in State A represented a multinational corporation in its dealing with purchasers of its products. The corporate headquarters were located in State A. In all sales contracts, the lawyer included a mandatory arbitration clause that referred all disputes between the client and purchasers to a State Z arbitral proceeding. The lawyer was not licensed in State Z, but the corporation and its buyers believed that State Z's commercial law was neutral and well developed and the arbitral forum had experience in efficiently resolving such disputes. Also, the client and buyers had extensive contacts with State Z. A buyer of a client product found a serious defect in the delivery and brought an arbitral proceeding in State Z. The transaction lawyer entered an appearance in the tribunal, which did not have a procedure to license out-of-state attorneys. May the lawyer properly represent the corporate client in this arbitration in State Z? A) Yes, because the representation of clients before arbitration proceedings is not the practice of law. B) Yes, because the lawyer represented a client in a pending arbitration proceeding that is reasonably related to the lawyer's work in the juris

B) Yes, because the lawyer represented a client in a pending arbitration proceeding that is reasonably related to the lawyer's work in the jurisdiction of the lawyer's licensure. Correct. Under Model Rule 5.5(c)(3), a lawyer may provide services related to an arbitration or mediation in a matter reasonably related to a jurisdiction in which the lawyer is licensed to practice law. The ABA enacted these rules to reject the California Supreme Court's decision to the contrary in the Birbrower case.

An American lawyer licensed in Washington, D.C., represented an international hotel group based in the United Kingdom seeking to enter a developing country's market controlled by that country's government. The lawyer negotiated a ten year venture to build five hotels in the country and then to operate them for 20 years. After 20 years, the hotels would become the property of the state hotel company. The agreement was subject to a mandatory arbitration clause and the American lawyer sought to apply a well-developed set of ethics conflicts principles to the conduct of the lawyers in the transaction. The American lawyer proposed that the contract include a choice of professional responsibility provision applying the United Kingdom's rules to such lawyer conflicts of interest. The contract also included a provision to arbitrate in the United Kingdom. The hotels would be designed and operated by a United Kingdom team of hotel managers. The contract contemplated two jurisdictions as having the most interest in the hotel construction and management - the developing country and the United Kingdom. The lawyer chose the conflicts rules of the United Kingdom as one country in which the conduct had

B) Yes, because the lawyer's choice to pick the United Kingdom's conflicts of interest rules was consistent with the reasonable judgment of the lawyers that the predominant effect of the contract was in the United Kingdom. Correct. Comment 5 to Model Rule 8.5 contemplates the use of a written agreement by a lawyer to choose conflicts rules under the predominant effect language of the text of Rule 8.5.

A government agency asked a law firm to represent it in taking over failing banks in the State. One of the lawyers in the firm owns a bank in the State that is in financial trouble. The lawyer with the financial interest agrees not to work on the government agency matters because his bank may be subject of the law firm work. It is possible that the lawyer's bank may not be subject of the agency's take over. Should the law firm inform the agency about the lawyer's financial interest? A) Yes, because the law firm must implement a screen of the lawyer who owns the financial interest in the bank. B) Yes, because the lawyers in the firm may be materially limited in their work for the government agency given the lawyer's ownership of a bank. C) No, because the lawyer's ownership of the bank is a personal conflict and not a law firm conflict. D) No, because it is possible that the lawyer's bank may not be subject to the agency take over.

B) Yes, because the lawyers in the firm may be materially limited in their work for the government agency given the lawyer's ownership of a bank. Correct. Because a lawyer in the firm has a financial interest in a bank that is failing, the other lawyers in the firm may either not work so hard for the government agency, or may share confidential information with that lawyer, or may not be so zealous on behalf of the government agency. This is a conflict that requires a determination that the firm can competently and diligently represent the government agency and client informed consent.

A lawyer represented a small business in recovering a large unpaid debt that left the business short of cash. The owner of the business emailed the lawyer every day asking if progress had been made. The lawyer was charging a contingent fee, so the lawyer could not charge any more for time spent responding to the client. The lawyer responded to the first several emails, but upon receiving the fifth daily email in a row, the lawyer informed the client that there were no new developments. Then, the lawyer said, "Please do not email me. I promise to contact you if there are new developments. I will not respond to your emails unless I have new information."Was the lawyer's decision to stop responding to the client's emails consistent with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the lawyer represented the client on a contingent fee basis. B) Yes, because the owner's' daily contacts were unreasonable and the lawyer told the client that she would let the client know about new developments. C) No, because it is for the client, not the lawyer, to determine how much information the client needs to have. D) No, because the lawyer must promptly respond to all client requests for information whether the law

B) Yes, because the owner's' daily contacts were unreasonable and the lawyer told the client that she would let the client know about new developments. Correct. Model Rule 1.4(a)(4) only requires a lawyer to comply with reasonable requests by clients for information. A daily email when no developments are expected would be found unreasonable. A lawyer can inform the client that the lawyer will update the client as soon as new information is obtained and will not respond until that time.

A personal injury lawyer was approached by a corporation that wanted to hire the lawyer to help it defend against frequent lawsuits by consumers for slight product defects. The amount at risk was in the millions of dollars, so the corporation needed to address their legal exposure. The personal injury lawyer normally charged a contingent fee for his work, but in a few cases had charged $400 an hour. In this case, the lawyer was reluctant to accept the representation because essentially the lawyer could never represent a plaintiff against this particular corporation. However, the lawyer offered to represent the client for $600 an hour with a minimum fee of $500,000 because the representation would preclude the lawyer from suing the corporation on behalf of other plaintiffs as long as he represented the corporation and thereafter for any related work. The lawyer informed the client about the reason for the enhanced fee and explained how this work would preclude him from suing the corporation for the foreseeable future. The minimum fee of $500,000 and $600 an hour was considered reasonable considering in light of the loss of business the lawyer would suffer in light of the conflicts created

B) Yes, because the reason the lawyer was charging an enhanced fee to the corporation was sufficient to make the fee reasonable. Correct. Under Model Rule 1.5(a)(2), a lawyer may only charge a reasonable fee. One of the factors to be considered is "the likelihood, if apparent to the client, that the acceptance of the particular employment will preclude other employment by the lawyer." That is the case here since the lawyer believes that the work for this corporation will preclude the personal injury from suing that corporation because of conflicts of interests.

A large corporation sought to hire a law firm in order to file a patent infringement lawsuit against a competitor. The corporation sought to interview a number of law firms in order to determine which counsel to retain in the litigation. The corporation approached the ABC Law Firm and asked it to provide a proposal, which detailed costs and approach of conducting the litigation. The ABC Law Firm agreed to participate in what is often referred to as a "beauty contest" as long as the communications occurred only with the client development lawyers and not the patent section of the firm. The client development lawyers in the law firm provided a detailed presentation and answered questions for the corporate management about how it would conduct the litigation. In those meetings, it is likely that those lawyers learned some basic confidential information about the proof that the corporation had about the infringement, but no more information than was required to determine whether to accept the representation. The corporation decided to hire other counsel in the litigation. The defendant to the litigation has contacted the ABC Law Firm to see if it can represent it in the patent infringement l

B) Yes, if the client development lawyers only received information that it needed to evaluate whether to accept the representation. Correct. Under Model Rule 1.18(d), a law firm can accept a representation contrary to a former prospective client if it timely screens the lawyers who received confidential information from that client and promptly provides written notice to the prospective client. But, the intake lawyers must limit the confidential information received to what is necessary to determine whether to accept the representation. The intake lawyers did that, so the law firm can take the case.

A lawyer licensed only in State One who practiced personal injury law used many creative ways to identify prospective clients. She would travel to State Two where she would engage in personal solicitation of prospective clients involved in an accident. Which state's lawyer disciplinary authority has jurisdiction over this lawyer's in person solicitation? A) Only State Two because that is the location of the lawyer's conduct. B) Only State One because that is the state of the lawyer's licensure. C) Both State One and State Two have jurisdiction over the lawyer's conduct and the lawyer could be punished in both states for the same conduct. D) Neither State One nor State Two.

C) Both State One and State Two have jurisdiction over the lawyer's conduct and the lawyer could be punished in both states for the same conduct. Correct. Model Rule 8.5(a) gives both a state of licensure and a state where the lawyer's conduct took place jurisdiction over the lawyer for purposes of discipline.

A lawyer licensed in State One represented a State One promoter who put together a limited partnership in State Two. The limited partnership included properties from State Two and the majority of the investors were residents of State Two. The lawyer associated with local counsel in State Two for the local law issues. In the limited partnership agreement, the lawyer included a provision that stated, "The parties agree that State Three's ethics rules will govern the transaction. The investors to this partnership are encouraged to seek independent advice of counsel in evaluating whether to accept this provision." This provision was included because State Three's ethics rules are more favorable to the promoter's interests, and the lawyer explained this to the investors. But the lawyer did not detail how such rules might impact the investor's interests.Was it proper for the lawyer to include this choice of professional responsibility clause in the partnership agreement? A) Yes, because the promoter as the initiator of the partnership transaction has the right to control which state's ethics rules apply. B) Yes, because the lawyer disclosed the reason why the promoter included this provision

C) No, because State Three had no relationship to the transaction. Correct. Most likely, under Model Rule 8.5, State Two's ethics rules will apply because that is the jurisdiction where the predominant effect occurs. Under Model Rule 8.5, no provision allows a party to a transaction to choose a jurisdiction's ethics rules when the transaction has no connection to the jurisdiction.

A lawyer (Lawyer #1) represented a personal injury plaintiff who was involved in a car accident. The defendant's attorney (Lawyer #2) quickly sent Lawyer #1 three low offers of $1,000, $2,000 and $3,000. Although Lawyer #1 and the plaintiff had not discussed settlement ranges, Lawyer #1 reasonably believed that the case was worth $100,000 or more. Because Lawyer #1 reasonably believed that no plaintiff would ever accept such a low offer, he did not communicate these offers to the client. Did Lawyer #1's conduct regarding the settlement offers comply with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because Lawyer #1 reasonably believed that the case was worth $100,000. B) Yes, because Lawyer #1 reasonably believed that no plaintiff would ever accept offers in this low range. C) No, because the client had an absolute right to decide whether to settle the case and Lawyer #1 needed to communicate those offers to the client. D) No, unless the retention agreement gave to Lawyer #1 the right to decide the appropriate amount to accept in a settlement.

C) No, because the client had an absolute right to decide whether to settle the case and Lawyer #1 needed to communicate those offers to the client. Correct. Model Rule 1.2(a) requires that attorneys abide by client decision to settle a matter. The authority of the client to consider settlements correspondingly requires the lawyers to communicate those offers unless an alternative agreement has been made. The lawyer needed to communicate the offers to the client. See Model Rule 1.4, Comment 2.

A lawyer represented a criminal defendant charged with murder. When considering whether to accept the representation, the lawyer examined the client's criminal record and determined that the client had such a poor criminal history that he should never take the stand to testify at trial. Therefore, the lawyer inserted a clause in the attorney-client agreement that stated that the client agreed that he would not exercise his right to testify at trial. During trial, the client decided that he wanted to testify and he so informed his lawyer. The lawyer reminded the client of his agreement not to do so and the client unhappily honored this agreement. Did the lawyer's conduct requiring the agreement not to testify comply with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the lawyer reasonably believed that this client had a complicated criminal history and therefore could not afford take the stand. B) Yes, because the lawyer and client contractually agreed that the client would not testify. C) No, because the client has an absolute right to decide whether to testify in a criminal case. D) No, because the attorney-client agreement created a conflict of interest between the lawyer and the client.

C) No, because the client has an absolute right to decide whether to testify in a criminal case. Correct. Model Rule 1.2(a) clearly states that the lawyer must abide by a client's decision to testify in a criminal trial.

A lawyer represented a client as a plaintiff on a contingent fee basis in the trial of a contract dispute. The judge dismissed the client's case in a motion for summary judgment and the lawyer urged the client to appeal. The lawyer was certain that the trial judge's decision would be reversed. The client was frustrated with the legal system and did not want to appeal. The lawyer offered to represent the client on appeal for no fee, and to lower the original contingency fee by 10%, but the client still refused. The lawyer will only be compensated if the appellate court reverses the decision and if the subsequent trial results in a verdict or settlement for the client. May the lawyer file an appeal for the client in this case? A) Yes, because the lawyer will not receive any contingent fee if the case is not reversed. B) Yes, because the lawyer will not charge the client any fee for the appeal. C) No, because the client has the right to decide not to appeal the case. D) No, unless the lawyer included a clause in the original retention agreement that gave the lawyer the power to force the client to appeal any trial decision.

C) No, because the client has the right to decide not to appeal the case. Correct. Model Rule 1.2(a) establishes the client's right to set the objectives in the representation and this includes the right not to appeal the summary judgment decision. The lawyer may use his or her persuasive power to influence the client's decision but may not override it.

A Big Law firm specializes in banking in all fifty states. A large bank client acquired a small bank client and a dispute arose under the acquisition agreement. The Big Law firm did not draft the acquisition agreement. The large bank asked the Big Law firm to file a lawsuit on its behalf. A lawyer in the state in which the large bank is located wishes to represent the large bank and a lawyer in the state in which the small bank is located wishes to represent the small bank. Both lawyers in that firm have never shared files or confidential information. Both large bank and small bank representatives consented in writing to having these lawyers represent each other in this litigation and they will abide by the decision of the trial court with no appeals. May the two Big Law firm lawyers represent the two clients in this litigation? A) Yes, because the two clients are sophisticated. B) Yes, because the two clients agree to be bound by the decision of the trial court. C) No, because the directly adverse conflict is nonconsentable. D) No, because the Big Law firm did not draft the acquisition agreement.

C) No, because the directly adverse conflict is nonconsentable. Correct. Under Model Rule 1.7(b)(3), this conflict involves the representation of one client against another client where they are asserting claims against each other. It is not consentable.

A woman called a lawyer to ask about a possible representation in a divorce. The lawyer talked to the woman for about an hour, but the woman decided not to hire the lawyer. The woman disappears and the police have subpoenaed the lawyer to ask why the woman called the lawyer. May the lawyer disclose the information about the phone call? A) Yes, because this involves law enforcement. B) Yes, because the woman did not hire the lawyer. C) No, because the information is protected by the attorney-client privilege and the lawyer must assert this doctrine to resist compelled testimony. D) No, because the information is protected by the work product doctrine of the rules of procedure.

C) No, because the information is protected by the attorney-client privilege and the lawyer must assert this doctrine to resist compelled testimony. Correct. The attorney-client privilege protects communications from a person seeking legal advice from a lawyer in order to encourage persons to consult with attorneys. The person does not need to hire the lawyer to have the communications protected by the privilege. The lawyer should assert the privilege on behalf of the client or prospective client unless that person waives the privilege. Here the lawyer should assert the privilege for the woman.

A lawyer who was representing a foreign government client as a defendant in human rights litigation was fired by the client. The lawyer did not give the client names of other lawyers who could take over the representation. The lawyer filed the necessary papers for withdrawal with the court, and the judge refused to grant the lawyer's motion. The judge ordered the lawyer to stay in the case. The lawyer informed the client about the judge's order and the client reaffirmed the termination of the lawyer's services. May the lawyer withdraw from the litigation representation under the Model Rules? A) Yes, the lawyer must withdraw because the lawyer was fired by the client. B) Yes, the client principal has terminated the relationship and the lawyer has no authority to act under agency law. C) No, because the judge ordered the lawyer to stay in the case. D) No, because the lawyer did not propose a list of lawyers to the client who could take over the representation.

C) No, because the judge ordered the lawyer to stay in the case. Correct. Notwithstanding the fact that the lawyer has been fired, Model Rule 1.16(c) requires a lawyer to stay in a case when a judge orders the lawyer to continue to represent the client.

A law firm represented one large bank (Large Bank) and several small banks in the state. Because the Large Bank generated significant business for the law firm, the firm would always ask new small bank clients to consent to future conflicts of interest that might arise with other clients including the Large Bank. The clause in the standard retention agreement stated: "The small bank agrees not to disqualify the law firm from representing any other client of the firm if a conflict arises. The small bank agrees to obtain new counsel for any matter related to the conflict of interest. And, if the small bank chooses to terminate its relationship with the law firm, the law firm will return all fees on any matters that have not been completed."May the law firm rely on the advance consent agreement to address conflicts with small bank clients under the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the law firm used a written agreement to address the future conflict of interest and such agreements were used in the corporate client context. B) Yes, because law firms may use advance consent agreements to address conflicts among clients in the same industry. C) No, because the language of this advance consent clau

C) No, because the language of this advance consent clause is too open ended and applies to all future conflicts that may arise with a small bank client. Correct. Comment 22 to Model Rule 1.7 notes that advance consent to future conflicts is unlikely to be valid when the language is broad and applicable to conflicts that are unknown at the time of the agreement.

A real estate lawyer was approached by two large corporate clients, one a seller of an industrial plant and one seeking to buy the plant. The corporations wanted the lawyer to represent each of them in negotiating the price and terms of the transaction, drafting the documents, and in closing the transaction. The lawyer knew the parties were sophisticated and capable of making informed decisions. But the lawyer also knew there were many conflicts in how this deal could be structured and the lawyer was uncertain as to whether she could represent both clients. The lawyer concluded that she did not have a reasonable degree of confidence that she could deliver competent and diligent representation to the corporate clients but she wanted to leave the final decision to the clients. The management of the two corporations agreed to waive the conflicts and have the lawyer represent both entities in negotiation of the price and terms of the deal. As sophisticated clients and experienced users of legal services, they explicitly took all of the risk to protect themselves in the transaction. May the lawyer represent the two corporations in this complex real estate transaction? A) Yes, because the cor

C) No, because the lawyer did not have a reasonable belief that she could deliver competent and diligent representation to both clients. Correct. Under Model Rule 1.7, the lawyer must reasonably determine that she can provide competent and diligent representation to each client. Because the complexity of the transaction and the avenues that a client could take to address these issues mean that she does not reasonably believe she can do so, the lawyer must decline the representation.

A lawyer represented a client who became unreasonable about communication requests. The client called the lawyer daily about whether there were any updates in a judicial proceeding in which the lawyer represented the client. The lawyer sent the client a note that asked the client to stop calling daily and informed the client that he would call him immediately if he had any updates on the case, but the client still continued to call. When the lawyer sent his note to the client, the client reported the lawyer to the state disciplinary authorities. The state disciplinary authorities initiated an investigation of the complaint and they contacted the lawyer for an explanation of the lawyer's position on communicating with the client. The lawyer was extremely upset at this investigation and he chose not to respond. He continued to represent the client in the matter. Is this an appropriate response to the state disciplinary authorities under the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the lawyer's conduct in communicating with this client was reasonable. B) Yes, because the lawyer was not permitted to disclose information to the disciplinary authorities about the client's unreasonable behavior. C) No, be

C) No, because the lawyer did not respond to the disciplinary authorities with an explanation of his interaction with the client. Correct. When a lawyer receives an inquiry about a disciplinary matter, the lawyer must respond to lawful requests for information. Model Rule 8.1(b). The response here was inadequate given the facts and the bar's questions. The lawyer should have explained generally his interaction with the client.

A transactional lawyer in a 100 person firm located in State A represented a chain of pawn shops that had locations in State A and State B. The corporate headquarters of the pawn shops was in State A. The lawyer, who was only licensed in State A, monitored pawn shop transactions to ensure that they did not violate state usury laws. Her work involved frequent travel to the pawn shop locations, including those in State B. In order to facilitate her work, the lawyer's firm opened an office in State B. This office was used only to perform work on the pawn shop usury issues; it was not open to the public. No other attorneys worked in this office in State B and the law firm did not register its office with the state bar authorities in State B. Is the lawyer's practice in State B proper? A) Yes, because the lawyer only represents the pawn shop, a client with headquarters in State A where the lawyer is licensed. B) Yes, because no other lawyer works in the office in State B and the office is not open to the general public. C) No, because the lawyer established a continuous and systematic presence in State B, a jurisdiction in which she was not licensed to practice law. D) No, because the law fi

C) No, because the lawyer established a continuous and systematic presence in State B, a jurisdiction in which she was not licensed to practice law. Correct. Under Model Rule 5.5(b)(1), a lawyer may not establish a systematic and continuous presence in State B. Opening an office in State B constitutes such a presence.

A lawyer represented a plaintiff in a personal injury matter. The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment and the lawyer filed a memorandum supporting the plaintiff's position. Two days after all filings were in, the judge granted the defense motion and dismissed the case. The lawyer was shocked and decided to withhold the decision from the client for two weeks until after the client paid her for the work to date. The trial judge was a friend and the lawyer believed that the client would insist that the lawyer seek to disqualify the judge and terminate the lawyer if she disclosed the ruling. Under the local rules, the time to move to disqualify was one week after the ruling and the time for appeal was 30 days.Was the decision to delay sharing the judge's opinion with the client consistent with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the lawyer sought the delay to protect her legitimate financial interests. B) Yes, because the lawyer sought to protect her friend's reputation by delaying the communication of the decision. C) No, because the lawyer failed to keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the matter. D) No, because the client could have done nothing about the judge'

C) No, because the lawyer failed to keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the matter. Correct. Under Model Rule 1.4(a)(3), a lawyer has a duty to keep the client reasonably informed about the status of a matter. Dismissal of the case was a critical development that had to be disclosed as soon as reasonably possible.

A lawyer represented a plaintiff in a personal injury matter on a contingent fee basis. The plaintiff was extremely interested in the law and asked the client details about the law and procedure in the case in order to evaluate any proposed settlement. The lawyer explained the basics, but after three meetings with the client, the lawyer told the client that in the future the client should research the law on her own. The client's desire to learn as much about the case as possible was motivated by wish to obtain information as to the value of the case with reference to potential settlement offers. The lawyer told the client, "I know you are not unreasonable, but I will let you know when we have a settlement offer that I think you should consider. Under a contingent fee arrangement, I cannot spent time giving you details about your representation."Was the lawyer's decision to stop providing the client with detailed information about the law and procedure of the case consistent with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the lawyer represented the client on a contingent fee basis. B) Yes, because the lawyer told the client that she let the client know when they had a good settlement offer. C) No

C) No, because the lawyer failed to respond to reasonable requests for information of a client who did not know the law and procedure in the representation. Correct. Under Model Rule 1.4(a)(2), a lawyer has a duty to keep the client informed about the means the lawyer is using the accomplish the client's objective and, under Rule 1.4(b), the lawyer has a duty to explain matters to the client to the extent that the client needs information to make adequately informed decisions. The lawyer must respond the reasonable request for information from the client. Many lawyers would prefer to have a client who does not ask many questions, but if the client does and if the requests are reasonable, the lawyer must respond.

A lawyer represented indigent and low income individuals in criminal cases. The lawyer was running on a trail the park when she ran into a local criminal trial judge who was also on the trail. The judge informed the lawyer that, if she wanted more court appointments that brought a generous statutory lawyers' fee, the lawyer would need to donate $1,000 a month to the judge's campaign. The lawyer expressed dismay at the suggestion and the judge said, "I have half of the criminal bar supporting my campaign through these payments, so if you do not want the cases, others will gladly take them." Afterwards, the lawyer considered informing a prosecutor or a state judicial commission about this information, but she thought that such a reporting could prejudice her clients. The lawyer did not report the judge's conduct to anyone. Did the lawyer's decision not to report the judge's conduct comply with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the misconduct involved a judge and not a lawyer. B) Yes, because the lawyer reasonably believed that the representation of her clients could be prejudiced if she reported the judge. C) No, because the lawyer had knowledge of a judge's violation of the code of judici

C) No, because the lawyer had knowledge of a judge's violation of the code of judicial conduct. Correct. When a judge approaches a lawyer for contributions to the judge's campaign in exchange for court appointments, it is a violation of Rule 4.1(A)(8) of the ABA Code of Judicial Conduct and calls the judge's honesty and integrity into substantial question.

A personal injury lawyer charged a client a 40% contingent fee to represent him in an accident case. The case settled for $2 million and the client was very happy with the lawyer's representation. The client told the lawyer that he would be going to Vegas at the end of the week to celebrate. The lawyer reasonably believed that the client was not sophisticated in money matters and thought that he might spend a large part of the settlement proceeds gambling. Thus, when the lawyer received the check for $2 million on Monday, the lawyer directed his assistant to place it in the client trust account. The lawyer did not notify the client of the receipt of the funds and waited two weeks from the receipt of the funds until the client came back to town before he asked the client to come into the office. At the office, the lawyer gave the client free lessons on money management and at that time delivered the client's share of the settlement proceeds. The lawyer informed the client that he had delayed notifying the client in order to protect the client. Was it proper for the lawyer to delay notification of the receipt of the funds to the client? A) Yes, because the lawyer reasonably believed that

C) No, because the lawyer had to duty to promptly notify the client of the receipt of the funds and to arrange for an accounting and a prompt delivery of the funds to the client. Correct. Model Rule 1.15(d) requires that when a lawyer receives money belonging to a client, the lawyer must promptly notify and promptly deliver the funds to the client. In a contingent fee case, the lawyer must prepare an accounting under Model Rule 1.5(c). The lawyer did not do any of these required tasks.

A lawyer participated in a weekend pro bono program sponsored by a court to help low income individuals injured during employment to receive limited legal services. The lawyer met a woman who worked for ABC Corporation, a company represented by the lawyer and his law firm. The woman suffered an injury on the job and has been unable to return to work. Because the court program is limited to answering questions and not taking any action on behalf of individuals who come to the program, the lawyer decided to provide the woman with basic information about her rights to sue ABC Corporation. He did not inform her about his relationship with her employer.Is the lawyer's decision to provide basic information to the woman proper under the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the lawyer limited his advice to general information about how employees injured on the job can pursue remedies and he did not take any action against his law firm's client. B) Yes, because the program was sponsored by the local court and the governmental involvement offered the lawyer immunity for his advice to individuals. C) No, because the lawyer knew that the woman sought advice about an accident that arose in the employment of

C) No, because the lawyer knew that the woman sought advice about an accident that arose in the employment of a current client of the lawyer and his law firm. Correct. Under Model Rule 6.5, the ABA permits lawyers to enter into a limited legal services engagement to answer basic questions at a program sponsored by a court or a nonprofit organization designed to assist persons in addressing their legal problems. Once the lawyer learns that the woman seeks legal advice about an accident that took place in a client of the lawyer or his law firm, the lawyer needs to decline to provide the advice.

A state decided to permit individuals who wish to become lawyers to do so through several alternative tracks: (1) the modern method of studying law at an ABA accredited law school and taking the bar exam, (2) studying law at a non ABA accredited law school and taking tests after the first year and third year to determine competence to practice, or (3) apprenticeship with a practicing lawyer in the state and a verbal test in front of a state trial judge who will determine the competence of the candidate. These rules were properly adopted and approved by the State Bar and the state high court. An applicant who attends an ABA accredited law school in this state decides to challenge the second and third methods of becoming a lawyer. The ABA models recommend the modern method of becoming a lawyer and do not recommend the non-ABA accredited approach or the apprenticeship model. However, the federal district courts in this state have permitted all admitted lawyers to practice before them regardless of the track the individual used in becoming a lawyer. A) Yes, because the state had violated the ABA recommendations on the method to become a lawyer. B) Yes, because the state delegates to a state

C) No, because the practice of law is delegated to the states and each state can determine their own rules for admitting lawyers to practice law.

A lawyer licensed in State One drafted all of the supply contracts for a corporate client in State One, but the client produced all of the products in State Two. The lawyer included a provision in all of the contracts that disputes arising under the agreement would be resolved in trial courts of State Three (Delaware), the place of incorporation of the corporate client. Another lawyer represented the buyer whose business is in State Four.A dispute arose between the buyer and the corporation over the production quality of the goods and the parties filed suit in State Three. Which state's ethics rules will apply in the State Three trial court? A) State One because that is the location of the lawyer's conduct and state of the lawyer's licensure. B) State Two because that is the location of the production facility of the corporation, which is place of the predominant cause of a manufacturing defect. C) State Three's ethics rules because the matter is pending before a trial court in State Three. D) State Four's ethics rules because the buyer's business is located in that jurisdiction and it is the likely location of the predominant effect of a product defect.

C) State Three's ethics rules because the matter is pending before a trial court in State Three. Correct. Under Model Rule 8.5(b)(1), in a case before a tribunal, the jurisdiction in which the tribunal sits is the determinative factor of the choice of ethics rule, unless the tribunal's rules select another set of rules.

Which one of the following developments has not had a significant impact on practice of law and its regulation in the last twenty-five years? A) The almost quadrupling of the number of lawyers in the United States. B) The shift of the work of lawyers from representing individuals to representing corporations and institutional clients. C) The increase in the power of self regulation of the legal profession by members of the bar and the judiciary. D) The commoditization of law practice through the use of technology so that legal work once done by lawyers is now done by individuals who routinize law practice through computers.

C) The increase in the power of self regulation of the legal profession by members of the bar and the judiciary.

A lawyer worked as general counsel for a hospital group and she received a request from a state disciplinary authority asking for information about an applicant to the bar. The bar sought all information about the medical history of the applicant to determine whether the applicant was fit to practice law. The applicant had signed a permission to authorized a treating physician to discussion his medical condition, but the permission did not directly authorize the hospital to release medical records to the bar authorities. Federal and state laws protect medical records of patients and the general counsel reasonably believed that such laws prevented her release of the documents to the bar authorities.Which response of the general counsel is consistent with the lawyer's duties to the bar under the Model Rules? A) Model Rule 8.1 requires that the lawyer provide the medical records to the bar authorities. B) Under Model Rule 8.1, the lawyer can only give to the bar any medical information that does not harm the applicant. C) The lawyer must not disclose the information and may inform the bar authorities that she believes that the request for information is not lawful. D) The lawyer must file

C) The lawyer must not disclose the information and may inform the bar authorities that she believes that the request for information is not lawful. 1 Correct. Once the general counsel reasonably believes that the request for information is not "a lawful demand," she should refuse to comply with it. This is a permissible reason for noncompliance with the general requirement of disclosure under Model Rule 8.1 and a requirement for the general counsel's competent representation of her hospital client. She may properly inform the bar authorities of her belief in order to avoid being charged with willfully withholding required information.

A real estate lawyer was approached by his neighbor to help the neighbor oppose the rezoning of a nearby tract of land. The lawyer agreed to conduct the representation for $150 an hour plus actual expenses. This rate was commensurate with other lawyers in the community. The lawyer and client met and the lawyer communicated the fee agreement and expenses arrangement orally. The lawyer did not memorialize any aspect of the agreement in a writing. The lawyer agreed to bill the client on a monthly basis with no advance retainer. The client agreed to the arrangement and the lawyer commenced working for the client. The lawyer completed the work within four months and the client gladly paid the lawyer the monthly billed fees. Was the lawyer's fee arrangement with the client consistent with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the lawyer charge a rate that was commensurate with other lawyers in the community. B) Yes, because the lawyer billed the client after performing the work, therefore the client could object to the lawyer's charges. C) Yes, although the lawyer preferably should have memorialized the fee arrangement in a writing before or shortly after commencing the representation. D) No, beca

C) Yes, although the lawyer preferably should have memorialized the fee arrangement in a writing before or shortly after commencing the representation. Correct. Under Model Rule 1.5(b), lawyers should "preferably" memorialize the fee arrangement before or shortly after commencing the representation. The lawyer's fee agreement in this case was communicated orally to the client and the lawyer should have followed up with a letter confirming the details of the arrangement. Rule 1.5(b) uses the word "preferably" because this language reflects the inability of the ABA to agree to a mandatory rule.

Recent government investigations identified an individual involved in war crimes during the Vietnam era. The individual was arrested and charged with several heinous crimes involving torture and execution of innocent citizens. The individual did not have an attorney and a public defender's office sought to locate a lawyer to handle the case. A lawyer with criminal experience volunteered to accept the representation for no fee. The individual confided in the lawyer that he had engaged in such conduct but wanted to plead not guilty. The lawyer received significant public criticism for accepting the representation. Does the lawyer's representation of the individual in the war crimes case involve an endorsement of the client's position? A) Yes, because the client's plea of not guilty involves a representation by the lawyer that a valid legal defense exists to contest the prosecution's case. B) Yes, because an attorney's acceptance of a case inherently involves an endorsement of the client's legal position. C) No, because the lawyer represented the client for no fee. D) No, because an attorney representation of a client does not necessarily constitute endorsement of the client's activities.

D) No, because an attorney representation of a client does not necessarily constitute endorsement of the client's activities. Correct. A lawyer's representation does not "constitute the endorsement of the client's political, economic, social or moral views or activities." Model Rule 1.2(b).

A law student filed an application to the bar and disclosed two criminal arrests in his past, both relating to public intoxication. The applicant provided detailed records to the bar authorities about the facts and the disposition. In the first incident, the prosecutor offered the applicant a deferred adjudication if she pled no contest. In the second incident, the prosecutor offered the applicant deferred adjudication if she enter a plea of no contest and performed 30 hours of community service. The applicant accepted both pleas and completed the required service. In the bar application process, the state bar character committee held an informal meeting on the applicant's fitness to practice law. The applicant appeared without a lawyer at the meeting and answered all questions truthfully. At some point during the meeting, the applicant realized that the bar authorities had combined the two incidents into one. The bar representative said, because the prosecutor chose to give you deferred adjudication in the incident, we approve your application. Since both incidents ended in deferred adjudication and were similar, the applicant did not correct the bar authorities on their belief there wa

D) No, because the applicant did not correct a misunderstanding known to have arisen in the bar admissions matter. Correct. Under Model Rule 8.1(b), an applicant for admission to the bar has the duty to correct a misunderstanding that the applicant knows has arisen in the matter even if the applicant was in no way at fault in presenting the information.

A lawyer represented homeowners selling their residences for an hourly rate of $125 per hour, about half of the rate charged by other lawyers in the community. In addition to the hourly rate, if the home sold, the lawyer would collect a flat fee of $5,000. The lawyer gave the client a written fee schedule detailing these two charges but did not have the client sign any agreement. Was it proper for the lawyer to collect this fee from his clients? A) Yes, because the lawyer provided the clients with a written fee schedule. B) Yes, because the lawyer charged an hourly fee half of the normal rate charged by other lawyers in the community. C) No, because the lawyer charged a fee based upon two calculations in a transactional matter. D) No, because the clients did not sign the fee agreement that contained a contingent fee component.

D) No, because the clients did not sign the fee agreement that contained a contingent fee component. Correct. Model Rule 1.5(c) requires all contingent fees to be in a writing signed by the client. The flat fee is contingent upon the home sale closing and that must be in a writing that is fully explained to the client.

A criminal defense lawyer represented a man charged with murder and held in custody without bail. The victim's body had not yet been discovered and the lawyer asked the client confidentially about his involvement in the crime. The client informed the lawyer about the crime and how this event had occurred. The lawyer felt sorry for the victim's family and wanted to disclose the location of the body to give the family closure, but the lawyer also knew that disclosure could provide forensic evidence that would link the client to the crime. The authorities were expending significant funds in trying to find the victim's body. However, the client did not wish to cooperate and instead wanted to take his chances at trial.Do the Model Rules permit the lawyer anonymously to disclose the location of the body? A) Yes, because the client was involved in a crime and disclosure could bring relief to the victim's parents. B) Yes, because the client's discussion of the past crime was not protected by the attorney-client privilege. C) Yes, because the client's refusal to cooperate with the authorities was unreasonable and the information related to a past crime. D) No, because the duty of confidentiality

D) No, because the duty of confidentiality protects information about past events provided to the lawyer by the client. Correct. All information given to the lawyer by the client is protected by the duty of confidentiality and the lawyer may not violate that duty without consent or without meeting one of the exceptions to the rule under Model Rule 1.6(b). None of the exceptions were implicated by this fact pattern, so the lawyer who chose to disclose the location of the body would violate the duty of confidentiality to the client.

A wills and estates lawyer had accepted so many pending will drafting matters that when a prospective client approached the lawyer to inquire about a will drafting representation, the lawyer had to inform the client that he would need a month to complete a draft of a will. The lawyer would not consider representations where such a delay would prejudice the client's interest, such as where the client was clearly near death. And, even after finding delay was not inappropriate in the client's individual case, the lawyer always would obtain the client's informed consent to the delay. Does the lawyer's approach to delay in preparing wills for new clients violate the lawyer's duty of diligence to the client? A) Yes, because a delay of one month is per se unreasonable for a wills and estates lawyer given that no one really knows when one is going to die. B) Yes, because the lawyer needs to stop accepting new representations until his delay is reduced so that he can promptly work on client matters. C) No, because the lawyer has no duty of diligence in a nonlitigation representation. D) No, because the lawyer analyzes the prospective representation to determine whether the month delay would prej

D) No, because the lawyer analyzes the prospective representation to determine whether the month delay would prejudice the client's interests and then obtains the client's informed consent to the delay. Correct. The duty of diligence is a requirement to act with "reasonable diligence and promptness." That standard is ultimately based on the effect of the delay on the client. A month delay in preparing a will is not so dilatory that it would prejudice most clients. However, in some cases, a month delay would be improper. The lawyer in this question analyzes the effect of the delay upon the client's interests and obtains the client's informed consent. That makes this lawyer's approach proper under the duty of diligence.

A lawyer represented several public utility companies that provided electricity to residential and industrial customers. Recently, Congress became interested in passing laws relating to a national electricity grid. The lawyer's clients suggested that the lawyer become involved in law reform, not as a fee paid matter, but as an interested lawyer who has experience in the industry. The lawyer joined a national bar association, Electric Grid Reform Group, an organization that sought to promote expanding the electric grid. The lawyer worked on preparing papers for presentation to Congress. At no time did his clients compensate him for his work, but he clearly advocated for positions that would materially benefit his clients. The lawyer did not inform the reform group when certain policies would materially benefit his clients. In fact, he believed that on balance the proposals had both beneficial and detrimental effect upon his clients. Was it proper for the lawyer to work on law reform for an organization that would benefit some of his clients? A) Yes, because the lawyer had a right to join an organization involved in the reform of the law. B) Yes, because the lawyer had first amendment rig

D) No, because the lawyer did not disclose to the Electric Grid Reform Group when his clients would be benefited by a position of the organization. Correct. The lawyer violated Model Rule 6.4's requirement that he inform the Electric Grid Reform Group that certain clients would be benefited by a legal position taken by the group. Lawyers are encouraged to join such organizations, but when a matter on which the lawyer works for the organization, will benefit a client of the lawyer, the lawyer is required to disclose that fact to the law reform organization.

A lawyer represented a client in a real estate sale and the client stopped paying the lawyer's monthly bills. The fee agreement stated that the lawyer would charge the client an hourly fee of $200 an hour, billed monthly, and the client had to pay the bill within 20 days. The lawyer billed the client for the month of June on July 1 and on August 1, the June bill had not been paid. On August 1, the lawyer billed the client for July hours and on August 20th, the client still had not paid the bill. On August 31, the lawyer sent the client a letter stating that he was withdrawing from the representation immediately because two bills had not been paid. The lawyer had not sent any other communications to the client during this time and the client had not consented to the lawyer's withdrawal. Was the lawyer's withdrawal from the representation consistent with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the lawyer's fee agreement clearly required the client to pay the monthly bill in 20 days. B) Yes, because the client had missed two monthly statements. C) No, because the client had not consented to the lawyer's withdrawal. D) No, because the lawyer did not give the client reasonable warning that unless t

D) No, because the lawyer did not give the client reasonable warning that unless the client made the payment promptly, the lawyer would withdraw from the representation. Correct. Under Model Rule 1.16(b)(5), a lawyer may withdraw if the client has failed to pay monthly bills, but only after the lawyer has given the client a reasonable warning that the lawyer will withdraw unless the client fulfills the obligation to pay the fee. In this case, no notice was provided to the client. Such notice must be provided when the withdrawal is based upon the client's failure to meet an obligation to the lawyer. If the client pays the lawyer, the lawyer may not withdraw from the representation.

A lawyer represented a car collector client who had arranged to sell a $500,000 antique car to a buyer. The client (who had to take an emergency flight to see his ill mother) asked the lawyer to take possession of the car and deliver it once the funds had cleared from the buyer. The client provided no instructions on where to store the car. The lawyer parked the car for one week in the public parking lot connected to the law firm. The lawyer did not ask the client where he should store the car. Had the lawyer done some research, he would have discovered that a professional who possessed such a car would store it either in a closed trailer or in a secure garage so that it is not exposed to weather, theft, or possible damage. In this instance, no damage occurred to the car and the lawyer delivered possession when the funds cleared.Did the lawyer's conduct regarding the possession of the car comply with the Model Rules? A) Yes, because the client provided no instructions for how the lawyer should store the car. B) Yes, because no damaged occurred to the car. C) No, because lawyers are not responsible for storing cars or other physical property and the lawyer should have declined to hold th

D) No, because the lawyer did not store the car in an enclosed trailer or in a secure garage. Correct. A lawyer must hold client property as a fiduciary would do and in this case leaving a $500,000 antique car in a public parking lot exposed the car to risk of harm. The lawyer should have placed the car in an enclosed trailer or secured garage.

A lawyer represented a client in litigation against an employer for gender discrimination. The client fee agreement stated that the client agreed to cooperate with the lawyer during the representation. The lawyer had a difficult time communicating with the client. The client took a long time to locate documents for the lawyer. And, the client often did not respond to lawyer phone calls and emails. Given the difficulty the lawyer had communicating with the client, the lawyer warned the client that he would need to withdraw unless the client became more responsive. The client did not change his behavior and therefore the lawyer sent the client a letter stating that he would withdraw in two weeks. Just after the lawyer sent the letter, the opposing counsel filed a motion for summary judgment. The response to that motion was due one week after the anticipated withdrawal date. Because the lawyer had given the client warning, he pushed forward with the withdrawal and did no work on the motion to oppose summary judgment. When the time came to argue the summary judgment motion, no substitute counsel had made an appearance. The lawyer withdrew and one week later the time passed for any response f

D) No, because the lawyer withdrew from the representation while a motion for summary judgment was pending without taking steps to protect the client's interests. Correct. Whenever a lawyer withdraws from a representation, the lawyer must take reasonable steps to protect the client's interests. Any pending proceedings such as this motion for summary judgment must be considered during the withdrawal process. The lawyer must inform the client of the need to file a motion to oppose the defendant's summary judgment filings. And, the lawyer could either prepare the motion and file it, ensure that new counsel prepare the motion, or seek postponement of the deadlines because of the imminent change of counsel. The lawyer did not take any steps in this case to address this pending motion and therefore the lawyer violated Model Rule 1.16(d).

A sole practitioner worked in the area of small accident cases and during the course of a month she would deposit and withdraw hundreds of thousands of dollars. The monies were deposited into a client trust account. Every month the bank assessed a $50 fee for maintaining the account. The lawyer deposited $1,000 of her money into the client trust account to cover the service charges for the foreseeable future. The lawyer informed her clients in the fee agreement that she planned to deposit her money into the client trust account to pay the bank service charges. Was it proper for the lawyer to deposit $1,000 into the client trust account? A) Yes, because the $1,000 was deposited for the express purpose of paying the bank service charge. B) Yes, because the lawyer informed her clients in the fee agreement that she planned to deposit her money into the client trust account. C) No, because lawyers may never put any nonclient funds into the lawyer trust account. D) No, because the lawyer's deposit of $1,000 into the client trust account was in excess of what was necessary to pay the $50 monthly bank service charges.

D) No, because the lawyer's deposit of $1,000 into the client trust account was in excess of what was necessary to pay the $50 monthly bank service charges. Correct. Model Rule 1.15(b) permits a lawyer to deposit personal or law firm funds into a client trust account to pay bank service charges, but only in an amount necessary to pay those fees. The deposit of $1,000 was unreasonably in excess of what was needed to pay these bank service charges.

A criminal defense lawyer sought to expand his business to hire profile clients and he informed the professional sports franchises that he was available to represent players charged with crimes on extremely favorable terms. When a player approached the lawyer, the lawyer assessed whether the player had the means to pay his hourly rate of $300 an hour. In cases in which the lawyer believed that the player did not have the resources to afford his rate, the lawyer would propose a fixed fee payable at the end of the representation only if the player did not receive a prison sentence. If the player client received a prison sentence, the lawyer would not collect a fee. The lawyer reasonably believed that such a fee structure enabled players without financial resources to obtain counsel. And, the lawyer tied the payment to the ability of the player to work and earn money to pay the fixed fee. May the lawyer charge athletes on the fixed fee structure described above? A) Yes, because the lawyer offered such an arrangement to players unable to afford his hourly rate. B) Yes, because the lawyer tied the arrangement to the ability of the player to work. C) No, because the lawyer did not offer the h

D) No, because the lawyer's fixed fee structure contained a contingent feature that forgave payment if the client received a prison sentence. Correct. Model Rule 1.5(c) outlines the requirements for contingent fees in a legal representation. Model Rule 1.5(d)(2) prohibits a lawyer from charging a contingent fee in a criminal case. This arrangement forgives the fee if the player client received a prison sentence. Thus, it offers the client a fee that is contingent upon the outcome of the case.

A large law firm in a populous Western State opened an office in a Southwestern State. The managing partner of the office was licensed in the Southwestern State. The law firm also sent five lawyers from the home office to help represent new clients in the Southwestern State, but those lawyers chose not to become licensed in the Southwestern State immediately. They continued to represent clients, hand out business cards with their names and new office address, and hold out to the public that they were licensed in the Southwestern State. The law firm worked solely with Fortune 100 corporations, and those entities were willing to hire lawyers to represent their interests worldwide regardless of licensure. These lawyers believed that because the office was supervised by a licensed attorney, their transactional work in the Southwestern State was authorized. May the lawyers who moved to the Southwestern State properly continue to offer legal services in the new office? A) Yes, because the Southwestern State office is supervised by an attorney licensed in the Southwestern State. B) Yes, because the law firm only represented Fortune 100 clients who were not concerned with licensure issues of th

D) No, because the lawyers who moved from the home office held themselves out to the public as attorneys licensed in the Southwestern State. Correct. When the out of state lawyers moved to the Southwestern State, they continued to represent clients, handed out business cards with their names and new office address, and did not inform clients about their lack of a local license. This conduct amounts to holding themselves out as licensed in the Southwestern State when in fact they were not. It was clearly the unauthorized practice of law under Rule 5.5(b)(2) and a violation of Model Rule 5.5(a).

What is the role of the American Bar Association in the regulation of lawyers in the United States? A) The American Bar Association is a national federal agency responsible for drafting and enacting model rules for the legal profession. B) The American Bar Association formally represents every lawyer in the United States in promulgating rules for regulating the legal profession. C) The American Bar Association has been designated by the federal judiciary as the organization to draft rules and regulations for lawyers in the United States. D) The American Bar Association is a voluntary trade group that seeks to represent its members and to issue guidance and model rules for states and other bodies to adopt in the regulation of the legal profession.

D) The American Bar Association is a voluntary trade group that seeks to represent its members and to issue guidance and model rules for states and other bodies to adopt in the regulation of the legal profession.

A lay person operated a legal self-help kiosk in a shopping mall. The person sold (1) paper wills forms for customers to use to complete their own wills, (2) a computer program with a series of questions that helped a person draft a contract, (3) a book on how to best represent yourself in small claims court, and (4) a divorce service that gave customers personalized advice on completing a divorce petition in court and an on call feature to answer questions during the filing of the petition. Which one of these services is likely to subject the nonlawyer to an unauthorized practice of law claim? A) The sale of the paper will forms for completion of a will. B) The sale of a book on representing yourself in small claims court. C) The computer program that helps customers to represent themselves in small claims court. D) The sale of a divorce service that gives personalized advice on completing a divorce petition in court.

D) The sale of a divorce service that gives personalized advice on completing a divorce petition in court. Correct. Divorce centers, will centers, and other lay businesses that sought to offer routine legal services often started with the sale of forms. Then, they moved to typing services. And they often ended up with a live person who helped you fill out the form by asking questions and providing advice. The live person who gives advice to a customer often crosses the line and constitutes unauthorized practice of law. Tailored advice is exactly what the rules seek to limit to licensed lawyers.