PR - From Book

Lawyer A represents a class of plaintiffs in a civil rights case against a state. The state agrees to provide substantially all of the relief the plaintiffs seek as long as lawyer B agrees to waive court awarded attys fees. The parties settle, and the Ps appeal the settlement on the ground that the states demand for waiver of atty fees undermines the goal of the statute. What result? A. The settlement is upheld. B. The settlement is reversed with regard to the waiver of atty fees.

A. The settlement is upheld. (evans v. jeff d. case)

Alpha, an associate at Lincoln & Center, working on a pro bono case for the ACLU, solicits clients for litigation to challenge the requirement of sterilization for pregnant mothers in order to continue receiving Medicaid. Has Alpha committed a disciplinary violation? A) Yes B) No

B) No --- (because the lawyers motive for the solicitation is not the lawyer's pecuniary gain under 7.3 as this is pro bono work)

Attorney represents a client in a divorce where the client wants primary custody of her children. Client instructs the attorney not to use evidence of her spouse's adultery. The attorney informs the client that the evidence would be helpful in gaining primary custody, but the client insists not to use the evidence of the adultery. If the attorney follows the client's instructions and the court denies the client primary custody and instead awards join custody, can the client succeed in a legal malpractice action against the attorney? A. Yes, because the attorney breached a duty to the client when the attorney failed to introduce evidence that would be helpful. B. No, because the attorney followed the client's instructions. Generally, a lawyer who follows clients instructions is not liable for malpractice.

B. No, because the attorney followed the client's instructions. Generally, a lawyer who follows clients instructions is not liable for malpractice. - No ethical duty to follow everything client says, but may be liable for malpractice if there is some loss to the client.

Atty represents a company selling widgets. Client told atty that a large number of customers recently returned their widgets. Client asked atty to review client's contract with the customers and advise the client whether it had to accept the returns and issue a refund. Atty reviewed the K and advised the client that it only had to issue refunds to customers who had returned widgets within 14 days. Atty recommended that the client issue refunds to all customers noting it was in the client's long-term business interests to have satisfied customers. Was the atty's conduct proper? A. Yes, because the attorney was required to give advice about relevant business considerations. B. Yes, because the attorney was permitted to refer to relevant business considerations. C. No, because the attorney was required to limit his advice to the relevant legal considerations. D. No, because the attorney's advice was contrary to the client's short-term interests.

B. Yes, because the attorney was permitted to refer to relevant business considerations. (2.1 allows atty to refer to economic considerations)

An attorney's oldest daughter is to begin College this fall at a prestigious University. The attorney did not have enough money to pay the tuition but did not want the daughter to take out student loans. After sharing this information with a long time client who owns a successful petroleum engineering firm, the client offered to loan the attorney the money for the tuition with no interest, if the attorney would agree to recommend that the daughter come to work for the client after graduation. The attorney was hesitant, but agreed when the client gave him the money directly, so the daughter would not know of the arrangement. The next day, the attorney prepared a promissory note reflecting what the client and the attorney agreed to and mailed a copy to the client to sign. The clients on the note and returned it to the attorney, who also signed the note and sent the client a full executed copy. Was the atty's conduct proper? A) No, because this is an improper business transaction with a client. B) No, because the attorney should never have made such an agreement without the daughters input. C) Yes, because the loan was the clients idea, not the attorneys. D) Yes, because the terms of the loan were fair and reasonable to the client.

A) No, because this is an improper business transaction with a client. - No advising of independent counsel or informed consent under 1.8(a) (must meet (1)-(3))

An attorney who represents a client and litigation received an email from the lawyer who represents the party on the other side of the litigation. The attorney quickly realizes that the lawyer has mistakenly sent him a document containing confidential client information. Under the rules, the attorney must: A) Notify the lawyer on the other side. B) Notify the lawyer on the other side and return the document without keeping a copy. C) Notify the lawyer on the other side and refuse to read the document. D) Read the document without notifying the volume on the other side.

A) Notify the lawyer on the other side.

A client is a citizen of a foreign country known for corruption. The client asks an attorney with whom he previously had no professional relationship to help the client purchase an expensive apartment with cash. During a meeting to discuss the details of this purchase, the client tells the attorney that the client would like to structure the purchase so that it would be very difficult if not impossible for someone to find out that the client purchased the property. When the attorney asked why, the client winked and said, "I don't like the government knowing what I am doing." The attorney agreed to accept the representation and said that he would structure the transaction so that the client was the sole shareholder in a corporation which owned another corporation which purchased the apartment with cash. This corporate structure made it extremely difficult for anyone to determine the client's identity as the purchaser of the property. The client had stolen the funds that were used to purchase the apartment. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A) Yes, because Rule 1.16(a) requires a lawyer to reject representation if the representation will result in violation of law. Here, the attorney helped his client conceal assets, which is a violation of 18 U.S.C. 1956 because the assets were the proceeds of a crime. B) No, because it is not illegal to create a corporation and thus the attorney may set up a corporation that owns another corporation that purchases real estate.

A) Yes, because Rule 1.16(a) requires a lawyer to reject representation if the representation will result in violation of law. Here, the attorney helped his client conceal assets, which is a violation of 18 U.S.C. 1956 because the assets were the proceeds of a crime.

the bd of directors of a client corporation votes to do a public offering of stock. The client hires an outside law firm to prepare the documents. A lawyer from the law firm communicates with the client's corporate personnel and obtains factual information relevant to the public offering that would put the client in a negative light. Upon review of this information, the attorney recommends that the client terminate its plan to do a public offering. The client's bd of directors agrees. If the information was subpoenaed, would the negative information obtained by the attorney be protected by atty-client privilege? A) Yes, because corporate personnel were communicating with the attorney on behalf of the client. B) Yes, because corporate personnel were communicating with the attorney to assist the atty with the atty's legal representation of the client. C) No, because the attorney communicated with multiple corporate personnel. D) No, because the information was provided to the attorney for the purpose of making it public.

A) Yes, because corporate personnel were communicating with the attorney on behalf of the client. B) Yes, because corporate personnel were communicating with the attorney to assist the atty with the atty's legal representation of the client. · True but there also must be an expectation of confidentiality for the privilege to apply C) No, because the attorney communicated with multiple corporate personnel. · irrelevant how many ppl the lawyer talks to D) No, because the information was provided to the attorney for the purpose of making it public. (correct) (they planned to go public the person communicating the info didn't reasonably believe that no one else would learn the contents of the communication - R§71)

A family law attorney was called late one night by a client who had been arrested, and wanted the attorney to try to get him released on bail. The attorney notified the client that the attorney did not practice criminal law. The client begged so the attorney went to the police station and tried to get the client out of jail, but failed because of the lawyer's lack of experience. The next day the attorney found an experienced criminal lawyer got the client out of jail within an hour. Was the attorney's conduct proper? A) Yes, because neither referral to another lawyer nor consultation with another lawyer was practical under the circumstances. B) Yes, because the attorney did not charge the client for his services. C) No, because the attorney did not have the legal knowledge and skill necessary to handle this criminal case. D) No, because the attorney was not able to secure the client's release on bail.

A) Yes, because neither referral to another lawyer nor consultation with another lawyer was practical under the circumstances. (Comment 3 of rule 1.1. expressly allows this because this was an emergency where the lawyer provided assistance in a manner where he did not have the skill required, and it was late at night so he couldn't refer another lawyer immediately. Comment 1 also explains that the required proficiency is that of a general practitioner, and expertise is generally not required. It says that the complexity of the matter is a factor to consider and this does not seem very complex at all.)

An attorney represented a company on transactional matters. After the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) advised the company that it was the subject of an investigation, the company asked the attorney if the attorney would represent it in the SEC investigation. The attorney declined to do so and the company retained other counsel. Nonetheless, from time to time, the company's representatives asked the attorney legal questions about the SEC investigation and the attorney provided off-the-cuff answers. Does the attorney have a lawyer-client relationship with the company for purposes of the SEC investigation? A) Yes, because the attorney answered the company's legal questions when the attorney knew or reasonably should have known that the company would reasonably rely on the attorney's answers. B) Yes, because the attorney previously represented company in its transactional work. C) No, because the attorney declined to represent company in the SEC investigation. D) No, because the company did not pay the attorney to represent it in the SEC matter.

A) Yes, because the attorney answered the company's legal questions when the attorney knew or reasonably should have known that the company would reasonably rely on the attorney's answers. (R.14, (1)(b) lawyer failed to manifest a lack of consent to provide legal services when asked the subsequent questions and the lawyer should have reasonably known that the company would reasonably rely on the lawyer's answers)

An inventor hired an attorney to file a patent and said that time was of the essence because of potential competitors. The inventor agreed to pay the attorney monthly based on how many hours the lawyer worked on the patent. The lawyer did some research and thought that everything looked good for the patent and then sent the client a bill, which the client never received, so the attorney didn't work on the patent for the next six months. Once the client was notified about the bill by the attorney the client paid the bill the same day. The attorney then resumed the work and saw that no one had filed a similar patent, so the lawyer filed the application and took steps so the client could issue the invention as patent pending. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A) Yes, because the attorney did not work on the inventor's patent for six months. B) Yes, because the attorney did not seek permission from a tribunal to withdraw from the representation. C) No, because a client cannot compel an attorney to work without payment. D) No, because the inventor did not sustain any harm as a result of the attorney's action.

A) Yes, because the attorney did not work on the inventor's patent for six months. (Lawyer violated 1.1 → doesn't matter that the client wasn't harmed. As long as the lawyer client relationship exists, you must provide competent representation.)

An Attorney, who is a certified elder law specialist, entered into a partnership with a certified financial planner. The partnership provided legal and other assistance to clients in connection with issues related to aging. The attorney did not allow the certified financial planner to interfere with the attorney's independent legal judgment. The financial planner performed only work that she was authorized to perform as a certified financial planner. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A) Yes, because the attorney formed a partnership with a certified financial planner and some of the activities of the partnership consisted of the practice of law. B) Yes, because the attorney's clients are subject to undue influence if they receive their legal services and financial planning at the same time. C) No, because it is in the best interests of the attorney's clients to receive coordinated advice about both legal services and financial planning. D) No, because the attorney did not allow the certified financial planner to interfere with the attorney's independent legal judgment.

A) Yes, because the attorney formed a partnership with a certified financial planner and some of the activities of the partnership consisted of the practice of law. (see 5.4(b))

An attorney is admitted in State A and works in the State A office of a law firm that has offices in States A and C. With the firm's permission, the attorney decides to transfer full-time to her firm's office in State C. The attorney gives advice to clients, signs correspondence, and negotiates transactions on behalf of clients. The attorney is supervised by a State C-admitted partner who meets periodically with the attorney to review her work. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A) Yes, because the attorney has a systematic and continuous presence in State C, where she performs legal work. B) No, because the attorney's work is undertaken in association with a lawyer who is admitted to practice in State C who actively participates in the matter.

A) Yes, because the attorney has a systematic and continuous presence in State C, where she performs legal work. (5.5(c)(because the position is permanent))

) Four attorneys form a partnership, and name it after the most senior attorney. Over the next two decades, one partner dies, another retires, and the third decides to go to a new firm. The only remaining attorney is the senior attorney who keeps the name Attorney & Partners, even though there are no other partners. The attorney believes the name is accurate because the paralegals and assistants working at the law firm feel like partners for their assistance. Is the remaining atty subject to discipline? A) Yes, because the attorney is no longer practicing in a partnership. B) Yes, because one partner died and another retired. C) No, because after two decades the clients recognize the law firm name. D) No, because the paralegals and assistants act like partners when they help with the cases.

A) Yes, because the attorney is no longer practicing in a partnership (7.1 comment 5 → can't be misleading, false or misleading to say you are in a partnership when you aren't)

Client retains a lawyer for assistance in a real estate transaction. Client asks the atty in confidence whether the atty thinks it is a good and workable deal. Is this information privileged? A) Yes, because the client was speaking in confidence to the atty. B) Yes, because it is privileged if the dominant intent is to seek legal advice, and the information also falls within the duty of confidentiality. C) Yes, because it is privileged if there was any intent to seek legal advice, but not protected by the duty of confidentiality as its disclosure would not injure the client. D) No, because the client was not seeking legal advice, and therefore also not within the duty of confidentiality under Rule 1.6.

A) Yes, because the client was speaking in confidence to the atty. - Too broad, just because speaking in confidence does not mean it is privileged. B) Yes, because it is privileged if the dominant intent is to seek legal advice, and the information also falls within the duty of confidentiality. (correct) - Asking primarily about the terms of the deal would mean its a communication that is atty client privileged. C) Yes, because it is privileged if there was any intent to seek legal advice, but not protected by the duty of confidentiality as its disclosure would not injure the client - Does not matter whether it would actually injure the client D) No, because the client was not seeking legal advice, and therefore also not within the duty of confidentiality under Rule 1.6. - This communication was seeking legal advice.

lawyer is representing a client who was ran over by a car while walking in a crosswalk. The lawyer investigates and finds a surveillance tape showing that the client, one minute before the accident left an adult movie theater with someone that was not the client's spouse. At a dinner party, the lawyer tells everyone the ironic story of the client who was ran over after being naughty. Was the atty's conduct proper? A) Yes, because the information about the client's whereabouts was not protected by the attorney client privilege. B) Yes, because the attorney did not violate any duties to the client because the information was not secret--it was known by the person who was with the client at the time. C) No, because the attorney violated the duty of confidentiality by disclosing information protected by attorney-client privilege. D) No, because the attorney violated the duty of confidentiality by disclosing information related to the representation that was not covered by any of the exceptions.

A) Yes, because the information about the client's whereabouts was not protected by the attorney client privilege. · Wrong answer because atty client privilege is an evidence rule that doesnt apply in this situation B) Yes, because the attorney did not violate any duties to the client because the information was not secret--it was known by the person who was with the client at the time. · does not matter whether it was a secret, duty of confidentiality is not contingent on the information being secret. C) No, because the attorney violated the duty of confidentiality by disclosing information protected by attorney-client privilege. · conflates the two ideas when they are actually different D) No, because the attorney violated the duty of confidentiality by disclosing information related to the representation that was not covered by any of the exceptions. (Rule 1.6 - correct answer)

Client is a used car salesman, who has been sued by a buyer who claims the buyer bought a car with the odometer turned back. The client retains the attorney to defendant the case and when the attorney asks the client to describe the dispute the client makes the following statements in confidence: I've destroyed a number of documents that could be used to prove the buyer's case. I still think there might be some documents in the files that could be relevant to the buyer's case. Could you look through the files and let me know what you think the buyer might ask for in discovery? Are those statements privileged? A)Yes, because the client sought advice on a legal matter and both statements were made in confidence. B)Yes, provided the client abandons any plan to destroy more records. C)No, because each statement can be used to prove that the client engaged in crime or fraud. D)No, only the first statement is privileged and the second is not privileged because the second statement was made to further a crime or fraud.

A)Yes, because the client sought advice on a legal matter and both statements were made in confidence. B)Yes, provided the client abandons any plan to destroy more records. This is right under the Restatement APPROACH, because there needs to be attempted wrongdoing for the crime/fraud exception to apply. C)No, because each statement can be used to prove that the client engaged in crime or fraud. D)No, only the first statement is privileged and the second is not privileged because the second statement was made to further a crime or fraud. This is right under the other authorities approach, second statement appears to be made to with intended wrongdoing.

A software startup wants High Tech law to represent it for its initial public offering. The startup recognizes that it cannot pay the normal hourly fee so it proposes an 2% equity interest for the representation. The parties enter a written fee agreement explaining the arrangement which advises the startup to consult outside counsel about the propriety of the fee agreement. High tech verbally explains that potential conflicts might arise, but no significant risks exist. Software doesn't consult outside counsel and signs the agreement. The IPO is more successful than expected making the firm's equity position $10 million. The startup is upset about the excessive fee and files a disciplinary complaint. What result? A. Discipline because the lawyers cannot take a proprietary interest in their client. B. Discipline because the fee was much higher than if high tech had charged an hourly fee. C. Discipline because high tech failed to ensure that software consulted outside counsel before signing the agreement. D. No discipline because high tech complied with the rules.

A. Discipline because the lawyers cannot take a proprietary interest in their client. (comment 4 of 1.5 → can obtain an equity interest in the company when in writing) B. Discipline because the fee was much higher than if high tech had charged an hourly fee. (irrelevant to the analysis) C. Discipline because high tech failed to ensure that software consulted outside counsel before signing the agreement. (1.8(a)(2) only requires there to be advice to seek outside counsel in writing) D. No discipline because high tech complied with the rules. (correct answer)

An attorney is employed in the legal dept. of a large retail clothing company and represents it in litigation. A group of current and former employees of the company filed a class action alleging that the company has and continues engaging in racial and gender discrimination. After discussing the lawsuit, the bd of directors of the company instructed the attorney to defend the case. Accordingly, the atty filed on behalf of the co. an answer in which the attorney asserted a defense to the P's claims. Although the attorney was aware that in the prior year the U.S. Supreme Court had rejected the use of that defense for all racial and gender discrimination claims, the attorney maintained in good faith that the Supreme Court's rejection of that defense should not apply to the facts of this case. The plaintiffs' lawyer moved for summary judgment and for sanctions against the attorney for asserting a frivolous defense. 4 weeks later, the court granted summary judgment, rejecting the attorney's defense based on the Supreme Court precedent. The court has not yet ruled on the motion for sanctions. Is the atty subject to litigation sanction and discipline? A. No, because in asserting the company's defense, the attorney had a good faith argument for a modification or reversal of existing law. B. No, because the attorney was following the instructions of the board, which is authorized to direct the attorney in legal matters. C. Yes, because the attorney should have withdrawn the defense within the time limits prescribed by Rule 11, which is 21 days after service of a motion for sanctions. D. Yes, because the attorney never should have asserted the defense in light of the Supreme Court's rejection of that defense.

A. No, because in asserting the company's defense, the attorney had a good faith argument for a modification or reversal of existing law. · Rule 3.1

An attorney is retained by a client to lobby the state in favor of legalizing recreational marijuana. In that state, the cultivation, harvesting, and marketing of marijuana for non medicinal purposes and without a doctor's medical prescription is a crime. The attorney's client is an active cultivator and marketer of recreational marijuana. While the attorney personally believes the recreational marijuana should be legalized, the attorney has been careful not to counsel the client with respect to its cultivation and marketing activities. The attorney has represented the client in correspondence with and appearances before the state legislature regarding the issue of legalization. In such correspondences and appearances, the attorney has been forthright about acting in a representative capacity but has not volunteered information about the client's illegal motivation in marketing activities. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. No, because the attorney is not counseling or assisting the client to commit a crime. B. No, because the attorney genuinely believed that recreational marijuana should be legalized. C. Yes, because the client is engaging in continuing illegal conduct. D. Yes, because the attorney has not volunteered information about the client's illegal cultivation in marketing activities during the attorneys appearances before the state legislature.

A. No, because the attorney is not counseling or assisting the client to commit a crime. a. 1.2(d)

Attorney spent nearly a decade in house for a large amusement park company as employment counsel. The attorney did all of the human resources legal work for the company, with the assistance of several paralegals. This included oversight and review of all hiring policies, including references and background checks, employment contracts, and benefits policy. Last year, the attorney left the amusement park company and joined a multinational law firm as a senior associate in the employment law team. Recently, a recession has decreased the amount of employment work at the firm, so the attorney is working in other practice groups as work arises. For the last month, the attorney has been working with the litigation team in various capacities. A recent case involves a property owner adjacent to the amusement park who is suing for nuisance based on the noise and lights from the park. The law firm has been hired to represent the adjacent property owner in its nuisance action against the amusement park company. Taking care not to use or reveal any confidential client information of the amusement park, the attorney assists the law firm with a representation of the adjacent property owner. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. No, because the attorneys previous work for the park is not substantially related to the nuisance cause of action. B. No, because it has been a year since the attorney did any work for the former employer C. Yes, because the attorney would be breaching the attorneys Employment contract with the former employer. D. Yes, because the attorney would be breaching the attorney duty of loyalty to the former employer.

A. No, because the attorneys previous work for the park is not substantially related to the nuisance cause of action. · Rule 1.9(a)

Atty received $10,000 retainer from client and put the money in the client's trust account. Atty anticipated doing at least 10hrs of work per week on the case over the next 4 weeks. Atty's rate was 200 an hour. In order to cover some unusual office expenses, the atty transferred $2,000 of the anticipated earnings into a business account. Atty explained to the client that the $2,000 had been moved and the client approved and as the attorney expected the atty worked on the case for 10 hrs each week for the 4 weeks. Is the atty subject to discipline? A. Yes because the atty withdrew money from the client's trust account before the fees were earned or expenses incurred. B. Yes because the atty used the client's fund for business expenses. C. No because the client approved of the atty's conduct. D. No because the atty accurately predicted the number of hours that would be worked over the 4 weeks.

A. Yes because the atty withdrew money from the client's trust account before the fees were earned or expenses incurred. (1.15(c) forbids this conduct / cannot commingle funds)

An attorney has been hired by a client to represent the client in a civil commitment proceeding initiated by the state. The client is now undergoing psychiatric evaluation to determine whether the civil commitment should be ordered. The client told the atty that the client intends to commit suicide as soon as the tests are completed, and the attorney believes that the client will carry out this threat. Suicide and attempted suicide are crimes in this state. The attorney discloses the client's intentions to the authorities. Is the atty subject to discipline? A. Yes because there is no evidence that the attorney knows that the client has attempted suicide in the past. B. Yes, because disclosure would aid the state in its civil commitment case against the client. C. No, because the information concerns a future crime and is not protected by the attorney client privilege. D. No, because disclosure of the information might prevent the client's death.

A. Yes because there is no evidence that the attorney knows that the client has attempted suicide in the past. B. Yes, because disclosure would aid the state in its civil commitment case against the client. C. No, because the information concerns a future crime and is not protected by the attorney client privilege. - This is not a privilege question, rather it is about the duty of confidentiality. D. No, because disclosure of the information might prevent the client's death. 1.6(b)(1) - correct

Atty asked by partner in the law firm to work with a long-time client who retained the firm to sue the client's landlord alleging a violation of the implied warranty of habitability. Partner told atty afraid the SOL was about to expire, the partner filed a lawsuit on behalf of the client in a hurry. Atty interviewed the client to get more details, client told atty that the landlord was shooting invisible but dangerous gamma rays. Client had no evidence. Atty tried to persuade the client that the client was mistaken and advised client to pay rent. Client angrily rejected. Atty reasonably believes that the client has diminished capacity. Atty took the following action: (1) asked the court's permission to withdraw from representing the client in the lawsuit, (2) consulted with clients daughter and shared the info, and (3) prepared to file an action seeking appointment of a guardian for the client in the event it is necessary. Is the atty's conduct proper? A. Yes, because a lawyer may take the described action to protect a client with diminished capacity from foreseeable harm. B. No, because the proposed action would violate the duty of confidentiality and duty of loyalty that the attorney owes to the client.

A. Yes, because a lawyer may take the described action to protect a client with diminished capacity from foreseeable harm. (Rule 1.14)

Atty represents a client who is under indictment for murder & attempted murder. Client told the atty that the client had previously killed 3 other people. Those murders were completely unrelated to the pending charges against the client. The client tells the atty that the bodies of the other victims are buried in a ravine near the corner of a local cemetery. The atty goes to the location described by the client, and the atty finds the bodies at the bottom of the ravine. The attorney does not touch or disturb the dead bodies in any way. The attorney does some investigation, and learns that three persons have been reported missing and that the authorities have an ongoing investigation into their whereabouts. The attorney does not disclose the location of these bodies to the authorities or any other information provided to the attorney by the client. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. Yes, because as an officer of the court, the attorney is required to disclose information the attorney has concerning the commission of the prior crimes by the attorney's client. B. Yes, because the attorney is impeding the authorities access to significant evidence. C. No, because the attorney obtained the information about the dead bodies in the course of representing the client. D. No, because the attorney did not represent or advise the client with respect to the prior crimes.

A. Yes, because as an officer of the court, the attorney is required to disclose information the attorney has concerning the commission of the prior crimes by the attorney's client. B. Yes, because the attorney is impeding the authorities access to significant evidence. - It is not the atty's job to help the authorities C. No, because the attorney obtained the information about the dead bodies in the course of representing the client. - 1.6(a) - correct answer D. No, because the attorney did not represent or advise the client with respect to the prior crimes. - A client's communications about prior crimes is covered by the duty of confidentiality even if the lawyer did not represent the client on the prior crime.

An attorney represents six homeowners, who live in the same Housing Development, against their developer. The suit arose after the developer built a road adjacent to the homeowners' property line. As a result of the new road, each of the six homeowners lost a linear section of their property. The developer compensated them for the land, but has refused to pay the cost of replacing the grass or landscaping these strips of property, leaving the property unimproved. After the suit was filed, the developer calls the homeowners' attorney and offers $12,000 to settle, but the offer is condition on settling with all six homeowners claims. The homeowners each own different amounts of land, the attorney has determined that it is fair to divide the total settlement by the percentage of the total impacted land owned by each homeowner. The attorney's paralegal prepares agreements for each of the six homeowners, detailing how much money they will receive of the total settlement amount. The attorney meets individually with each homeowner and explains the settlement, including how much each homeowner will receive. Each homeowner agrees to the settlement and signs the agreement. Is the attorney's conduct proper? A. Yes, because each homeowner was informed of the amounts received by all homeowners and agreed in writing. B. Yes, because an attorney should seek to effectuate settlements and avoid litigation. C. No, because the attorney should not represent all parties on one side of an action. D. No, because the attorney shared with the homeowners the settlement amounts of the other homeowners.

A. Yes, because each homeowner was informed of the amounts received by all homeowners and agreed in writing. (see 1.8(g))

A lawyer represented a client who had been injured in a car accident. The case was settled with the insurance company on the conduction that the client generally released all of the clients personal injury protection benefits. Afterwards, the client had another medical bill come up that normally would have been paid by the insurance. The lawyer realized that she had negligently drafted the settlement, and the lawyer told the client that if the client settled the malpractice claim, then the lawyer would pay the medical bills. The lawyer thought the settlement was fair and advised the client to seek independent representation. The client did not seek independent representation but signed the settlement agreement. Was the attorney's conduct proper? A. Yes, because the attorney advised the driver in writing to seek independent representation before entering the settlement agreement and gave the driver time to retain independent counsel. B. Yes, because the attorney initiated the settlement discussions with the driver. C. No, because the attorney, rather than another lawyer, drafted the settlement agreement that settled the driver's potential malpractice claim. D. No, because the driver was not independently represented when signing the settlement agreement with the attorney.

A. Yes, because the attorney advised the driver in writing to seek independent representation before entering the settlement agreement and gave the driver time to retain independent counsel. (see 1.8(h)(2))

An attorney represent a client in a sexual harassment claim against her former boss, a West Coast software company executive. The attorney learned from the client that another former employee of the software company was an eyewitness to the alleged incidents of sexual harassment. That witness, however, had moved back East to live with his ailing parents. The attorney contacted and interviewed the witness and ultimately concluded that the witnesses testimony would be helpful to the client's case. The attorney asked the witness to travel back to the West Coast to testify at trial. The witness complain that as a salaried employee, he would lose income from traveling to the West Coast for trial. As a result, the attorney offered to pay for the witnesses actual travel expenses, the witness's Lost income from his employment, and $200 in the event that the client recovers from the defendant. The witness accepted the offer. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. Yes, because the attorney may not pay the witness the $200 contingent fee. B. Yes, because the attorney may not enter into a contract with a witness to appear in court. C. No, because the attorney may offer an inducement to a witness in exchange for favorable testimony. D. No, because the amount promise to the witness for appearing and testifying was reasonable.

A. Yes, because the attorney may not pay the witness the $200 contingent fee. · 3.4(b) and § 117

An attorney represent a famous actress who is being prosecuted for the brutal murder of her husband. The case is being tried before a jury. After police officers took the stand and testified as to what they saw at the scene of the crime, the court recessed. During the court recess, the attorney held a press conference on the courthouse steps. Before television cameras, the attorney said, "we expect to prove that my client had nothing to do with this man's death. In fact, we have definitive forensic evidence that proves beyond any doubt you're not client is not the killer. We do not know who the real killer is but we have reason to believe, based on the nature of this heinous crime oh, that this person is very dangerous. If anyone has any information relating to the killing, please contact us immediately so that we can bring the real killers to justice." Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. Yes, because the attorney should not have made the statement regarding proof based on forensic evidence, as that statement has a substantial likelihood of being materially prejudicial. B. Yes, because the attorney inappropriately made melodramatic statements about the dangerousness of the real killer. C. No, because the attorney was acting appropriately as a zealous advocate for the client. D. No, because criminal defense attorneys are granted a wide range of discretion with respect to extrajudicial statements.

A. Yes, because the attorney should not have made the statement regarding proof based on forensic evidence, as that statement has a substantial likelihood of being materially prejudicial. (3.6(a))

Attorney entered into a written retainer agreement with client in a divorce proceeding. Client agreed to provide the attorney 10% of the final settlement if the divorce was finalized within three months. The atty secured a 1 million dollar settlement before the deadline and sent the client a $100,000 bill. The client paid the bill and thanked the attorney. Is the atty subject to discipline for entering into the agreement? A. Yes, because the atty agreed to a fee contingent on the securing of a divorce. B. Yes, because $100k is not a reasonable fee for the services rendered. C. No, because the client was happy with the atty's services. D. No, because the agreement was in writing.

A. Yes, because the atty agreed to a fee contingent on the securing of a divorce. (1.5(d)(1) prohibits this)

An lawyer is representing a client who has been charged with murder. The murder weapon, a gun, has never been found. In a conference with the attorney, the client says: "I'm worried about them finding that gun. I can't see any way out other than to get rid of it. I'm going to throw it in the swamp tonight; they'll never find it there." After the client leaves, the attorney calls the police and tells them about the client's plan. The police then follow the client and arrest the client just before the client is going to throw the gun away. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. Yes, because there is no exception to the duty of confidentiality under these circumstances. B. No, because the attorney should not have to sit silently while the client commits a future crime. C. No, because the information was not privileged because the client was not seeking legal advice. D. No, because disposing of a weapon could lead to death or serious bodily harm.

A. Yes, because there is no exception to the duty of confidentiality under these circumstances. (CORRECT) B. No, because the attorney should not have to sit silently while the client commits a future crime. - Because lawyer is not authorized to violate the duty without a valid exception. C. No, because the information was not privileged because the client was not seeking legal advice. - Not an issue of privilege, this is irrelevant here. D. No, because disposing of a weapon could lead to death or serious bodily harm.

A client, who has been convicted of murder, asks an attorney to request a death sentence rather than life in prison. Must the attorney follow this instruction? A. Yes, because this decision is about the client's objective. B. No, because a lawyer may not limit the scope of representation in a manner that is unreasonable.

A. Yes, because this decision is about the client's objective.

Plaintiffs won a class action civil rights suit where the judge entered an award for attorney's fees under the fee shifting statute based upon the lodestar which is calculated by the number of hrs worked multiplied by the hourly rate. The judge did not feel like this was enough given that the lawyers worked really hard and were forced to cover substantial expenses. Can the judge award additional compensation? A. Yes, the lodestar may be increased due to superior performance and results provided that the judge identifies extraordinary circumstances to justify the enhancement. B. Yes, the lodestar may be increased at the judge's discretion because the judge, having observed the lawyers' work, is in the best position to determine whether an enhancement is warranted. C. No, the lodestar may not be increased because a judge is never allowed to award a fee enhancement under the federal fee shifting statutes. D. No, the lodestar may not be increased because it is too difficult for the judge to calculate an appropriate enhancement.

A. Yes, the lodestar may be increased due to superior performance and results provided that the judge identifies extraordinary circumstances to justify the enhancement. (perdue case)

Is it ethical for an attorney to bill two clients the hourly fees for work performed at the same time (e.g. billing one client for reviewing a contract while traveling for another client)? A) Yes B) No

B) No (the formal opinion says this is unethical bc it results in the earning of an unreasonable fee in violation of 1.5)

An attorney leaves her law firm to become in-house counsel for a corporation. The attorney moves to a state in which the attorney is not currently licensed and in which she does not plan to become licensed. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A) Yes, because she is not providing legal services on a temporary basis. B) No, because she is working as in-house counsel.

B) No, because she is working as in-house counsel. (see 5.5(d)(1))

The court advises an attorney that the court plans to appoint the attorney to represent a teenage girl seeking court permission to obtain an abortion without the consent of her parents. The attorney believes that abortion is murder and asks the court not to appoint him to represent the teenage girl. The attorney advises the court that the attorney cannot do a competent job for the client given the attorney's personal beliefs. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A) Yes, because an attorney should not seek to avoid a court appointment. B) No, because the attorney did not believe that he could provide competent representation of the teenage girl.

B) No, because the attorney did not believe that he could provide competent representation of the teenage girl.

An attorney represented a client in the sale of a printing business owned by the client. The purchaser of the printing business has filed suit against the client and the attorney, alleging that they committed fraud by misstating the financial condition of the client's printing business. The attorney had advised the client to disclose all of the financial information concerning the printing business to the purchaser. The client and the attorney each have separate lawyer to defend against the purchaser. The purchaser's lawyer has subpoenaed the atty to attend a deposition. Under questioning by the purchaser's lawyer, the attorney reveals, to the extent the attorney reasonably believes necessary to defend herself, confidential information about the client that will be favorable to the atty but damaging to client. Is the atty's conduct proper? A) Yes, unless the client objects to the disclosure. B) Yes, because the attorney may reveal such information to defend herself against a civil claim. C) No, because such disclosure of confidential information may only be made by attorney to defendant against criminal charges, not a civil claim. D) No, because attorney made the disclosure knowing it would be detrimental to the client.

B) Yes, because the attorney may reveal such information to defend herself against a civil claim. (1.6(b)(5)) C. is wrong because the exception is civil or criminal

This was a situation where a law firm partner told a new associate that mainly had worked on trust and estate matters that the associate would have to try a case the following week. The associate objected, explaining that she had never seen a trial, and had not taken evidence, or trial advocacy in law school. The attorney made her do it anyway and as a result she asked improper questions at trial and couldn't get in some of the key evidence at trial, so the jury returned a verdict for the opposing party. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A) Yes, because the attorney should not have selected an associate from the trusts and estates department. B) Yes, because the attorney's "sink or swim" method of associate training did not represent "reasonable efforts" to put in place measures that give reasonable assurance that all lawyers in the firm conformed to the duty of competence. C) No, because it is impossible to know whether the associate's trial conduct caused the jury verdict in favor of the opposing party. D) No, because the associate was able to telephone the attorney for advice during lunchtime and other breaks during the trial.

B) Yes, because the attorney's "sink or swim" method of associate training did not represent "reasonable efforts" to put in place measures that give reasonable assurance that all lawyers in the firm conformed to the duty of competence. (Rule 5.1(b) requires the partner of a law firm to make reasonable efforts to ensure that the firm has in effect measures giving reasonable assurance that all lawyers conform to the rules of professional conduct, but here the attorney was not being reasonable by directing a lawyer who was incompetent under Rule 1.1 to try the case.) IT IS FINE TO DELEGATE WORK, but cant delegate professional responsibility

A lawyer represented a client who was convicted for murder. Before sentencing, the attorney investigated the client's mental health by asking mental health professionals and the clients family and friends. The lawyer knew that the prosecution was going to introduce prior convictions, but the attorney failed to review those files. Had the attorney done so, they would have revealed the clients mental health issues, and there is a reasonable probability that the client would have gotten life in prison rather than the death penalty. Should the client's verdict be overturned because he received ineffective assistance of counsel? A) Yes, because the attorney failed to provide zealous representation to the client. B) Yes, because the attorney's conduct was unreasonable and it prejudiced the client. C) No, because the attorney's interviews with the client and the client's family members did not indicate the existence of mitigating evidence. D) No, because it is not certain that the additional evidence would have changed the jury's decision.

B) Yes, because the attorney's conduct was unreasonable and it prejudiced the client. (just like the Rompilla case)

Atty who graduated two years ago trying to develop personal injury practice, but is struggling to find new clients. Atty hires a marketing firm to prepare a website featuring flashy photos of the atty addressing a jury, arguing a case before a judge, and shaking hands with satisfied clients. The website includes a disclaimer stating that results will vary depending upon the particular legal and factual circumstances. The atty has never actually appeared in court. Once the website went live, the atty began receiving numerous appointments for new clients. Is the atty subject to discipline? A) Yes, because the website created an unjustified expectation about the results that could be achieved in court. B) Yes, because the website implied that the atty had appeared in court when in fact the attorney had not. C) No, because commercial speech is protected under the First Amendment. D) No, because the website contained an express disclaimer about the results a client could expect.

B) Yes, because the website implied that the atty had appeared in court when in fact the attorney had not. (7.1 false and misleading)

a client gives an atty a $10,000 retainer to defend the client in a property dispute. The atty charges $100hr. The next day the atty spends 10 hrs on the matter, conducting research. The client sends the atty an email late that evening: "Please don't begin working on my property dispute matter. My neighbor has agreed to settle." Atty sends the client a $1,000 bill for the 10 hrs and the client demands the immediate return of the $10,000 because the attorneys research or work was not needed. What should the attorney do with the 10 grand? A. Transfer $1,000 to the atty's fee account and return $9,000 to the client. B. Leave $1,000 in the client's trust account until the disagreement over the fees is resolved and return $9,000 to the client. C. Keep the full $10,000 in the client's trust account until the disagreement is resolved. D. Estimate the number of hours that will be involved in resolving the disagreement and transfer that amount along with the $1000 to the atty's fee account with the remaining amount returned to the client.

B. Leave $1,000 in the client's trust account until the disagreement over the fees is resolved and return $9,000 to the client. (under 1.15(e) the earned money must remain there until dispute is resolved and lawyer must promptly distribute undisputed property)

For 3 months, an atty has represented a local manufacturing company in a contracts dispute with the company's landlord. Last week, an employee of the manufacturing company asked the attorney to represent the employee in an action against the manufacturing company for failing to comply with wage and hour laws. The contract dispute and the wage and hour matter have no common issues of law or fact, and the attorney reasonably believes that he can competently represent the clients in the respective matters. The attorney accepts and begins representation of the employee in the wage and hour matter after both the employee and the manufacturing company provided informed consent in writing. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. No, because the attorney is confident that the lease negotiations and the wage and hour matter have no common issues. B. No, because both the employee and the manufacturing company gave informed consent to the representation. C. Yes, because the employee and the manufacturing company are directly adverse. D. Yes, because the new client is an employee of the manufacturing company.

B. No, because both the employee and the manufacturing company gave informed consent to the representation. (1.7(b))

An associate at a large Law Firm is working on a deal for Corporation. The associate works regularly with an assistant general counsel at the corporation who is supervising the deal. Their close working relationship becomes a close personal relationship, and they begin to date. They are considering a sexual relationship and thinking about moving in together, so the associate stops working on the case and instead transfers the case to a colleague. Is the associate subject to discipline? A. No, Because the assistant general counsel is also a lawyer. B. No, because the associate stopped representing the corporation before beginning a sexual relationship. C. Yes, because if the associate is prohibited from working on the matter, so are the other lawyers in the law firm. D. Yes, because the associate dated the assistant general counsel while representing the corporation.

B. No, because the associate stopped representing the corporation before beginning a sexual relationship.

A member of a national gun rights organization was being prosecuted for assaulting a member of a national gun control organization during a protest march. During closing arguments to the jury, the attorney for the defendant said to the jury, "as a juror, you have a unique opportunity to defend your second amendment rights. Do you want a world where only thieves have guns? I certainly don't. As a proud gun owner for 20 years, I personally cherish our Second Amendment rights to own guns as the last bastion of liberty. Therefore, I support my client who was merely asserting his Second Amendment right. You should, too." Was the defense attorney's statement proper? A. No, because the attorney attempted to influence the jurors with emotion. B. No, because the attorney asserted a personal opinion as to the justness of the cause of the Second Amendment. C. Yes, because the attorney properly reminded the jury of their solemn responsibility in the case. D. Yes, because the attorney genuinely believes in the justness of the Second Amendment cause.

B. No, because the attorney asserted a personal opinion as to the justness of the cause of the Second Amendment. a. See 3.4(e)

An attorney spent more than a year negotiating the sale of a subsidiary of one of the attorneys largest clients. The attorney, along with the clients accountant, reviewed and analyzed the seller's financial statements as part of the due diligence. The deal closes after extensive negotiations and provisions of the sale. Several months after the closing, the buyer brought an action against the seller for fraud based on a failure to disclose certain debts before the closing. The seller wants the attorney to defend it in the action at trial. While the attorney believes the attorney may be called as a witness in the action, he accepts and begins the representation. What is the attorney's conduct proper? A. No, because the attorney violated duties owed to the seller in closing on a possibly fraudulent deal. B. No, because the attorney likely will be called as a necessary witness in the action. C. Yes, because there will be no contested issue on the content of the financials D. Yes, because the accountant is able to testify if the buyer calls a witness.

B. No, because the attorney likely will be called as a necessary witness in the action. · 3.7 - none of the three exceptions apply

A mother and her daughter are partners in a business venture to develop a software program. Their business is not Incorporated, but is a general partnership, with a partnership agreement. The daughter is the primary creative contributor and the mother is the primary business contributor. The mother wants to retire, but the partnership agreement is unclear about certain issues related to the financial settlement upon dissolution of the partnership. State law is also ambiguous on these issues. The mother and her daughter both want an amicable dissolution, and they agree on what is a fair split of the partnerships assets. they paid $90 for a dissolution agreement from a legal website. They each reviewed the document and signed it, and they want an attorney to review it for legal enforceability. A good friend has been the attorney for the partnership since its inception. The attorney also has represented the mother in her estate planning and the daughter in the purchase of her first home, and in a personal injury suit. The mother and her daughter visit with their attorney together and ask if the attorney will review the document for enforceability. During this meeting, the attorney advised the mother and the daughter that the attorney would be representing each of them equally in reviewing the agreement and their communications would not be confidential. The attorney also told them that if the two began to disagree on how to split the assets, or if any other conflict arose, the attorney would withdraw and would not represent either from that point forward. The attorney provided an engagement letter detailing these terms, and both the mother and her daughter The agreement. The attorney proceeded with the representation. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. No, because the attorney should, when possible, review legal documents that originate from paid websites. B. No, because the attorney reasonably believed the attorney could provide competent and diligent representation. C. Yes, because the attorney previously represented the mother and her daughter in other matters. D. Yes, because the attorney did not advise the mother and her daughter to seek the advice of independent counsel before signing the agreement.

B. No, because the attorney reasonably believed the attorney could provide competent and diligent representation.

An attorney representing tenants and landlord tenant disputes has often litigated before a particular state court judge in a state in which judges are elected to the bench. That judge is now running for re-election. Based on the attorney's previous observations and interactions with this judge, the attorney general and genuinely believes that this judge is well-mannered, polite and judicious. However, the attorney also genuinely believes that a judge with a more activist judicial philosophy would better serve the attorneys many clients, who are in desperate need of overhauling the law governing landlord tenant relationships. Once, on the way to the courtroom, a local news reporter approached the attorney and asked the attorney to rate the judicial candidate running for re-election. The attorney responded, "well, I don't normally discuss judicial candidates but since you ask me I believe this candidate is unsuited for the bench and does not possess what I would call proper judicial temperament." Were the attorney's remarks proper? A. No, because the attorney should not make disparaging public remarks about a candidate because such remarks threatened the independence of the judiciary. B. No, because the attorney was not truthful in expressing views about the candidate. C. Yes, because the attorney was exercising the First Amendment right to freedom of speech. D. Yes, because the attorney was acting as a zealous advocate for the attorney's clients.

B. No, because the attorney was not truthful in expressing views about the candidate. 8.2(a)

A homeowner wanted to buy a piece of property adjacent to the home to avoid development. The homeowner wanted to use a home equity line of credit for the financing, but there was not enough equity. The seller offered to loan the homeowner the money if the homeowner could get a surety, or co-signer. The homeowners grandmother agreed to serve as surety, and the seller agreed to the loan with the grandmother as the surety. The grandmother wanted her attorney, who has worked for the family for many years, to serve as her counsel and homeowner's counsel in the transaction. The seller uses the same attorney for real estate work, and wanted the attorney to also serve as counsel to seller. This type of representation is permitted in the jurisdiction. Given the circumstances and the familiarity among the parties, the attorney reasonably believed he could adequately represent the interests of each of the three parties. All three parties gave informed consent, in writing, and attorney began the representation. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. No, because the attorney is familiar with and has worked previously with each of the parties. B. No, because this is a consentable conflict of interest, and the party's properly consented. C. Yes, because the attorney, having done real estate work for the seller before, will inherently favor the seller's interest. D. Yes, because an attorney is prohibited from representing three parties with differing interests.

B. No, because this is a consentable conflict of interest, and the party's properly consented.

A lawyer is an e-discovery specialist. The plaintiff hired the lawyer to work with the plaintiff's trial counsel to frame e-discovery requests and responses. The client signed a retainer agreement limiting the scope of the lawyer's representation to advice about e-discovery. Is the attorney's conduct proper? A. Yes, because the client initiated the request for limited representation. B. Yes, because a lawyer may limit the scope of the representation as long as the limitation is reasonable under the circumstances and the client gives informed consent. C. No, because the plaintiff was not independently represented in making the agreement. D. No, because the attorney was required to work directly with the plaintiff rather than working with the plaintiff's trial counsel.

B. Yes, because a lawyer may limit the scope of the representation as long as the limitation is reasonable under the circumstances and the client gives informed consent. (1.2(c))

An attorney is a notable expert on financial regulation. The attorney was asked to appear before Congress to present the attorneys view about the problems of flicking the banking sector during the recent financial crisis. Before Congress, the attorney testified that the best reform was no reform because regulation is bad for banks and bad for America. These were, in fact, the attorneys genuine views. However, the attorney declined to mention that a large Bank, a client of the attorney, was compensating the attorney for the appearance in time before Congress. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. Yes, because an attorney may not accept a fee for providing Congressional testimony. B. Yes, because an attorney representing a client before a legislative body must disclose that the appearance is in a representative capacity. C. No, because the attorney presented only genuine views. D. No, because the attorneys comments to Congress are protected by the 1st amendment's guarantee of the freedom of speech.

B. Yes, because an attorney representing a client before a legislative body must disclose that the appearance is in a representative capacity. a. 3.9

Client retained personal injury attorney. Client agreed to a contingency fee arrangement. Client obtained a jury verdict for a larger amount than the client and lawyer anticipated. Defense appealed, and the D made an offer to settle for the amount the attorney had originally projected as reasonable to expect. The client directed the attorney to accept the offer and settle. The attorney, confident that there was no reversible error in the trial, the attorney refused the settlement. The attorney reasonably believed that the appeal was filed solely to gain negotiating advantage. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. Yes, because the attorney's percentage under the fee contract increased after appeal. B. Yes, because the attorney did not comply with the client's direction to accept the settlement offer. C. No, because the decision whether to settle or defend an appeal is a tactical matter for the attorney to determine. D. No, because evaluation of the merits of an appeal requires an attorney to exercise independent professional judgment.

B. Yes, because the attorney did not comply with the client's direction to accept the settlement offer. Rule 1.2(a) says a lawyer shall abide by a clients decision to settle a matter.

An attorney represented a client in a slip and fall accident claim against the owner of a local burger restaurant. The client alleged that he fell on a banana peel while walking toward the drink machine at the restaurant. Three weeks prior to the date designated for trial, the attorney discovered a customer who witnessed the accident. The attorney interviewed the customer witness, who contradicted the testimony of the client. The witness claimed that there was no banana peel on the floor and that the clients kids were running around the restaurant and tripped the client, who then fell on the floor. The witness asked the attorney, "do I have to appear in court? I really can't take time off of work to appear in court?" the attorney replied, "if you can't take time off of work, then you shouldn't answer your phone." The attorney never mentioned this conversation with a witness to the opposing counsel, who knew nothing about this witness. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. Yes, because the attorney failed to notify opposing counsel of a witness who had relevant adverse evidence. B. Yes, because the attorney improperly suggested that the witness refrain from speaking about what the witness saw, and the witness is not a relative, employee, or agent of the client. C. No, because the opposing Counsel had not yet subpoenaed the witness to testify. D. No, because the attorney has ethical obligation to represent her client zealously.

B. Yes, because the attorney improperly suggested that the witness refrain from speaking about what the witness saw, and the witness is not a relative, employee, or agent of the client. (3.4(f))

An atty represents a client in a PI lawsuit against the driver of a truck that collided with the client's car. In preparation for a deposition, the attorney interviewed the client, who claimed to be in perfect health before the accident. However, as the interview progressed, the atty noticed a number of inconsistencies in the client's story. The attorney now reasonably believes, but is uncertain, that the client is lying about her health prior to the accident. The deposition is scheduled for tomorrow, and the client intends to testify about the previous "perfect health." May the attorney allow the client to testify about her health at the deposition? A. Yes, because the duty not to offer false evidence does not apply to depositions. B. Yes, because the attorney is not certain that the client intends to provide false testimony. C. No, because the attorney is an officer of the court and has the obligation to prevent the trier of fact from being misled by false evidence. D. No, because the attorney is prohibited from offering false evidence in a proceeding.

B. Yes, because the attorney is not certain that the client intends to provide false testimony. (3.3(a)(3) only applies to knowing conduct)

A homeowner meets with an atty to discuss a possible property claim against an apartment building owner. Homeowner explains the claim, but the atty determines that the homeowner cannot afford the atty's services and refuses the case. The apartment building owner then meets with the atty and offers to meet all of the attorney's financial terms. In representing the apartment building owner, the attorney uses the information the homeowner provided, reasoning because they never had an atty client relationship, the attorney did not owe the homeowner a duty of confidentiality. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. Yes, because the homeowner was a client B. Yes, because the homeowner was a prospective client C. No, because the homeowner was not a client D. No, because the information was not dispositive of the property claim

B. Yes, because the homeowner was a prospective client (rule 1.18(b)-(c))

This spring in the middle of your law school exams, your friend from undergrad finds you at a party. He explains that he is having a problem with his landlord and asks your advice. You tell him what you learned about his problem in property class and explain it to him. Which of the following is correct? A) You have committed Unauthorized Practice of Law. B) If you were a lawyer, you would have created a client-lawyer relationship. C) Both A and B are correct. D) Neither A nor B is correct.

C) Both A and B are correct.

An attorney is the managing partner at a small law firm. The attorney believes that technology will be increasingly important in the delivery of affordable legal services and hires a nonlawyer to manage the law office's technology services. This person is given the title of Chief Technology Strategist. The Chief Technology Strategist does not participate in any decisions involving legal judgment. The firm pays the Chief Technology Strategist a fixed salary that is larger than the salaries of some of the associate lawyers and larger than the salaries of all of the other nonlawyer staff. The Chief Technology Strategist is included as a participant in the firm's year-end profit-sharing plan along with the lawyers and other nonlegal staff who work at the firm. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A) Yes, because legal fees are used to fund the year-end profit-sharing plan. B) Yes, because the Chief Technology Strategist makes more money than some of the lawyers in the law firm. C) No, because the Chief Technology Strategist may be included in the firm's year-end profit sharing arrangement. D) No, because the attorney reasonably believes that the year-end profit sharing plan is necessary in order to attract top talent and deliver competent services to clients.

C) No, because the Chief Technology Strategist may be included in the firm's year-end profit sharing arrangement. (see 5.4(a)(3))

An attorney represented a client in connection with the client's divorce. The attorney and the client had several disagreements about the tactics to use and the client stopped paying the attorney. After a few weeks, the client decided he would be better off with another lawyer and told the attorney he was fired. After giving the client sufficient notice to obtain replacement counsel, the attorney requested the court's permission to withdraw from the divorce litigation, but the court denied the request. The attorney continued representing the client. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A) Yes, because the attorney had a mandatory duty to cease the representation because he was discharged by the client. B) Yes, because the attorney's representation of the client will result in an unreasonable financial burden on the attorney. C) No, because the attorney was required to remain in the case after the court denied the attorney permission to withdraw. D) No, because the attorney's withdrawal would have caused material prejudice to the client.

C) No, because the attorney was required to remain in the case after the court denied the attorney permission to withdraw.

An attorney has a regulatory law practice and is also a part owner of a lobbying firm, which employs lawyers and non-lawyers to provide lobbying services. The lobbying firm's rate and policies are comparable to those of other local lobbying firms. Each week, the attorney spends time conducting lobbying activities from the lobbying firm offices, and time providing legal services from the attorney's law firm, which is located in a different building. The attorney recently advised one of her clients that the client might want to lobby the legislature to change the regulations that govern the client's conduct. The attorney advised the client that the attorney owned a lobbying firm. The attorney carefully explained that the services provided by the lobbying firm were not legal services and that the legal ethics rules did not apply to the lobbying firm or to the attorney while engaged in the lobbying for the lobbying firm. The attorney told the client to feel free to consult other lobbyists and lawyers in order to decide who to hire, and that there was no obligation to hire the attorney's lobbying firm. Following these disclosures, the client retained the attorney's lobbying firm to lobby the legislature for a rule change. In conducting lobbying activities for the client, must the attorney comply with the rules of professional conduct relating to client confidentiality? A) Yes, because the attorney's lobbying services for the client are law-related activities. B) Yes, because the attorney's lobbying services are not distinct from the legal services the attorney provided to the client. C) No, because the attorney's provision of lobbying services was distinct from the attorney's provision of legal services to the client and the attorney took reasonable measures to make sure that the client knew that the lobbying services were not legal services and that the protections of the client-lawyer relationship would not exist with respect to the lobbying services. D) No, because the rates and policies of lobbying firm are comparable to those of other lobbying firms that are not subject to the Rules of Professional Conduct.

C) No, because the attorney's provision of lobbying services was distinct from the attorney's provision of legal services to the client and the attorney took reasonable measures to make sure that the client knew that the lobbying services were not legal services and that the protections of the client-lawyer relationship would not exist with respect to the lobbying services. (See 5.7)

An attorney, who is admitted to practice only in State A, agrees to represent a client incorporated in State B in connection with the client's purchase of a State B company. The attorney from State A was retained to represent the State B client because the attorney had previously represented that client and the client's parent corporation, which was a State A corporation. (Representing the parent and the subsidiary corporations did not create a conflict of interest for the attorney.) The attorney travels to State B from his State A office several times to negotiate the purchase of the company for the client. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A) Yes, because the attorney did not have a license to practice law in State B. B) Yes, because the attorney did not associate with local counsel in State B. C) No, because the attorney's representation of the client was reasonably related to the lawyer's practice in State A, where the lawyer is admitted to practice. D) No, because the client asked the attorney to come to State B to handle the negotiations.

C) No, because the attorney's representation of the client was reasonably related to the lawyer's practice in State A, where the lawyer is admitted to practice. (see 5.5(c)(4))

A state decides to restrict lawyer ads in order to protect the reputation of lawyers and to prevent lawyers from misleading potential clients. The state enacts content restrictions prohibiting lawyers from using client testimonials, attention-getting techniques that are clearly unrelated to criteria for selecting a lawyer, or a nickname, moniker, motto or trade name that implies an ability to obtain results in a matter. It also establishes a 30 day temporary prohibition on targeted advertising following a personal injury event. Plaintiffs sue to enjoin these restrictions. What result? A) The court upholds both the content restrictions and the moratorium. B) The court upholds the content restrictions, but not the moratorium. C) The court upholds the moratorium, but not the content restrictions. D) The court enjoins both the content restrictions and the moratorium.

C) The court upholds the moratorium, but not the content restrictions. (Alexander v. Cahill)

In defending a major securities fund case, a law firm uses attorneys who receive an hourly salary. If the salaried attorneys are paid $100 per hour, is it ethical for the firm to bill the client $150 per hour? A. Yes B. No C. It depends on whether the attorneys are employees of the firm or whether the law firm purchases their services from an outside agency.

C. It depends on whether the attorneys are employees of the firm or whether the law firm purchases their services from an outside agency. (formal opinion says it is unethical for a firm to upcharge the client if they aren't employees of the firm, but if they are it would be reasonable because there is overhead) (law firms cannot make money if they can't charge more than what they pay their lawyers)

A parts supplier and a manufacturer often transact business together. The manufacturer disputes the most recent bill sent by the supplier. Ordinarily, the lawyers of both companies settle any billing disputes arising from their relationship. But this time, an in-house accountant of the manufacturer contacts the attorney of the supplier and asks the attorney to modify the bill. The attorney asks the accountant, "shouldn't your company's attorney be contacting me as we normally do?" to which the accountant replies, "normally yes, but our attorney is very busy, and this time I'm authorized to handle this matter." The attorney continues to discuss the matter with the accountant and finally agrees to modify the bill on behalf of the supplier. What's the attorneys conduct proper? A. Yes, because the attorney properly inquired about the other side's lawyer. B. Yes, because the accountant initiated with the contact attorney, not vice versa. C. No, because the accountant works for the manufacturer and the manufacturer is known to be represented by counsel. D. No, because the attorney departed from the custom of having billing disputes settled by both the attorneys of both companies.

C. No, because the accountant works for the manufacturer and the manufacturer is known to be represented by counsel. a. 4.2

A transactional attorney who advised corporations on tax matters was meeting with an acquaintance on a legal matter. The acquaintance had a relative who had died and named the acquaintance the executor of the relative's estate. The lawyer told the acquaintance that he was inexperienced and was too busy to do the work to become competent, so the lawyer offered to refer the acquaintance to an experienced lawyer because there might be deadlines he should follow as the executor. The acquaintance did not contact another lawyer for the next 8 months, and as a result this created a lot of legal fees for the estate. Is the attorney subject to civil liability? A. Yes, because the attorney should not have agreed to meet with the acquaintance unless the attorney was prepared to accept his case. B. Yes, because the attorney did not advise the acquaintance of a specific date by which he should consult a lawyer. C. No, because the attorney did not violate any duty owed to the acquaintance. D. No, because the acquaintance declined the attorney's offer to refer the acquaintance to a lawyer with expertise.

C. No, because the attorney did not violate any duty owed to the acquaintance. (the lawyer used reasonable care here)

A federal law requires most self employed individuals to pay taxes quarterly. The statute makes failure to pay a misdemeanor, but it is much more common for the IRS to impose a civil penalty. Atty represents small business owner who doesn't want to deal with the paperwork. Client willingly pays the civil penalty for the failure to pay each year. Client calls attorney and asks whether any taxpayers had been criminally prosecuted for failure to pay taxes. Client also asks if there was anything the client could do to avoid detection. Atty told client that the atty could not find any examples and said that it would be improper to advise the client how to avoid detection. Client thanked the atty for the info and hung up. Atty later prepared client's annual taxes, noticing that the client had not paid the quarterly tax payments. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. Yes, because the attorney reasonably should have known that the information she gaves the client would encourage the client to violate the law. B. Yes, because the attorney did not discourage the client from breaking the law. C. No, because the attorney provided the attorney's honest opinion about the consequences that were likely to result if the client violated the law. D. No, because the attorney and the client are permitted to discuss methods to avoid detection.

C. No, because the attorney provided the attorney's honest opinion about the consequences that were likely to result if the client violated the law. (authorized by 1.2(d))

An atty represented a client charged w/murder. The client insisted on taking the stand. The attorney was certain that the client intended to provide false testimony and told the client if the client lied on the stand, the attorney would have no choice but to inform the judge of the client's perjury. The client took the stand but testified truthfully because of the attorney's threat. After the trial, the jury convicted the client. Does the client have a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel? A. Yes, because clients have an unfettered right to testify in their own defense in capital cases. B. Yes, because it is never proper for an attorney to threaten a client. C. No, because the attorney's conduct fell within accepted standards of professional conduct and did not undermine the confidence in the outcome of the trial. D. No, because the client's refusal to commit perjury showed that the attorney's threat was effective.

C. No, because the attorney's conduct fell within accepted standards of professional conduct and did not undermine the confidence in the outcome of the trial. a. See nix v. whiteside

A lawyer was asked to represent an inventor who wants to bring a multimillion dollar patent infringement lawsuit. The attorney reasonably believes he is competent, but does not have sufficient insurance coverage in the event of malpractice. The client agrees to a maximum of $20 million on the attorney's malpractice liability, the lawyer shows the client the agreement, recommends the client consult other counsel, but the client doesn't and signs the agreement. Local law allows the limited liability contract. Is the attorney's conduct proper? A. Yes, because the agreement is not prohibited by law in the client's jurisdiction. B. Yes, because the client gave informed consent, the agreement was in writing, and the client was told of the advisability of consulting independent counsel. C. No, because the client did not consult independent counsel before signing the agreement. D. No, because the lawyer may not make an agreement limiting malpractice liability to a client.

C. No, because the client did not consult independent counsel before signing the agreement. (rule 1.8(h)(1) requires that the client be independently represented if the lawyer makes an agreement limiting liability)

An attorney represented an employee in an employment negotiation with a company for whom the employee works. The company asked the attorney to represent it in real estate negotiations with a property owner in another state. With informed consent from both the employee and the company, the attorney agreed to represent the company in the real estate negotiations. Neither the employee nor the company consulted with the independent counsel before giving consent, and the attorney did not recommend that they do so. In the course of the real estate negotiation, the attorney learned in confidence that the company plans to relocate the employee to the state. The attorney knew that this would be important information for the employee to know in connection with her employment negotiations, but the attorney concluded the employment negotiations without disclosing this information to her. Six months later, the company relocated the employee, who was upset that the employment contract negotiated by the attorney did not protect her from the adverse impact of the relocation. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. No, because the clients gave informed consent to the representation. B. No, because the attorney did not represent one client adversely to the other. C. Yes, because the attorney did not withdraw from representing the employee after he learned confidential information from the company that was important to the employee. D. Yes, because the attorney did not advise the clients to consult independent counsel before giving informed consent.

C. Yes, because the attorney did not withdraw from representing the employee after he learned confidential information from the company that was important to the employee.

A company's board of directors discovered evidence that someone had embezzled $30,000 from the company's treasury. The board members believed that the likely embezzler was an officer and that the officer was about to transfer the money and flee the country. However, the board recognized that there was also evidence that the embezzler was the officer secretary who might have stolen the funds without the officer's knowledge. The company asked its attorney to obtain an emergency court order to freeze the officers bank account until responsibility for the embezzlement could be conclusively determined. In accordance with the state's procedural rules on emergency orders, the attorney Salt the court order and appeared in court without giving notice to the officer. The attorney then presented the evidence supporting the theory that the officer embezzled the money. The attorney did not present the evidence that the secretary may have been responsible. The court granted the emergency motion. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. No, because there is no duty to present evidence that is adverse to the clients motion. B. No, because the attorneys duty to present contrary evidence was superseded by the company's right to confidentiality. C. Yes, because the attorney failed to disclose evidence indicating that the secretary, acting alone, may have embezzled the money on her own. D. Yes, because the attorney communicated with the court without including the opposing party.

C. Yes, because the attorney failed to disclose evidence indicating that the secretary, acting alone, may have embezzled the money on her own. (3.5(b) and 3.3(d))

An attorney specializing in divorce law regularly appears before a female divorce court judge in a state in which judges are elected to the bench. Once at a divorce law conference sponsored by the local bar association, numerous divorce lawyers, including the attorney, gather together to complain amongst themselves about this judges mistreatment of their female clients. These lawyers believe they have witnessed the judge repeatedly make disparaging remarks about women who are financially incapable of supporting themselves after divorce, being rude and abrupt to female litigant seeking maintenance and child support payments from their spouses, and making rulings that are patently unfair to female litigants. These lawyers also openly wondered why female judge would show such strong bias against women. After the conference, the attorney contacted many other divorce lawyers, who confirmed that they had similar experiences with this judge. The attorney then proceeded to draft a public petition and began mobilizing an effort to recall this judge, in accordance with the proper State recall procedures applicable to judges. When someone suggested that the attorney also contact the bar disciplinary authorities, the attorney dismissed the idea, noting, "Bar counsel will never prosecute anyone." Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. No, because the attorney statement about Bar Counsel is the attorney's opinion. B. No, because there is no rule prohibiting attorneys for mobilizing a recall effort. C. Yes, because the attorney failed to inform the appropriate disciplinary authorities about the judge's misbehavior. D. Yes, because the attorney has improperly mobilized a recall effort, which threatens the independence of the Judiciary and the rule of law.

C. Yes, because the attorney failed to inform the appropriate disciplinary authorities about the judge's misbehavior. (8.3(b))

An attorney represents a terminated employee in a discrimination lawsuit. The parties were in the process of negotiating a settlement. The attorney for the employee retained an expert to prepare a report on Damages incurred by the employee. A copy of the report was furnished to the lawyer representing the former employer for use in settlement negotiations. The report incorrectly stated that the employee had to remained unemployed after the termination and as a result vastly overstated the employees damages. In fact, soon after the termination, the employee had obtained new employment at a salary higher than the prior job. The attorney knew about the reports errors but failed to correct them or consult with a client where the expert on the issue. During settlement negotiations the attorney were remarked to opposing counsel, " you know, ever since my client was unjustly fired, he has been pouring through the classifieds looking for a job and struggling to make ends meet. " Shortly after the settlement agreement was signed by both parties, the former employee learned about the terminated employees new job and salary. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. No, because the attorney's statements constitute acceptable puffing in negotiations. B. No, because the attorney statements are exempt from the requirement to be truthful in the context of settlement negotiations. C. Yes, because the attorney made a false statement of material fact or law to a third person. D. Yes, because the attorney should not have allowed the expert to prepare the report.

C. Yes, because the attorney made a false statement of material fact or law to a third person. a. 4.1(a)

An attorney represents a client in a negligence action against a driver who accidentally collided with her car. In the course of the representation, the attorney discovered evidence that could lead one to reasonably conclude that the driver had improperly entered the US, which is a criminal misdemeanor. After discussing the issue with a client, the client consented to the attorneys using this information as leverage to negotiate a favorable settlement. The attorney phoned the opposing lawyer and said, "we I have reason to believe that your client has entered the country unlawfully. If you give us $400,000 we can make your clients deportation go away. The local prosecutor happens to be one of my best friends. "it was later determined that the driver had properly and lawfully entered the country. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. No, because the attorney reasonably believed that the man was guilty of a crime. B. No, because the attorney was required to report knowledge of criminal conduct. C. Yes, because the criminal issue was unrelated to the clients civil claim and the attorney suggested that the attorney had improper influence over the criminal process. D. Yes, because the attorney was mistaken about the legal status of the drivers entry into the United States and US violated the driver's rights.

C. Yes, because the criminal issue was unrelated to the clients civil claim and the attorney suggested that the attorney had improper influence over the criminal process. a. 4.4(a)

A law firm employee hired a lawyer to file an employment lawsuit against the law firm. When the managing partner of the law firm approached the law firm's reception area, a process server handed the partner the summons and the complaint for the lawsuit. The managing partner immediately called the law firm's Director of Human Resources and asked the director to talk to the employee about the employment claim. As requested, the director went to the employee's office and asked factual questions about the employees claim. Is the attorney, the managing partner of the law firm, subject to discipline? A. No, because the Director of Human Resources only asked factual questions. B. No, because the Director of Human Resources is entitled to discuss employment claims with employees. C. Yes, because the employee was represented by counsel. D. Yes, because the managing partner solicited the Director of Human Resources into engaging in the unauthorized practice of law.

C. Yes, because the employee was represented by counsel. a. 4.2

Attorney spent nearly a decade in house for a large amusement park company as employment counsel. The attorney did all of the human resources legal work for the company, with the assistance of several paralegals. This included oversight and review of all hiring policies, including references and background checks, employment contracts, and benefits policy. Last year, the attorney left the amusement park company and joined a multinational law firm as a senior associate in the employment law team. Recently, a recession has decreased the amount of employment work at the firm, so the attorney is working in other practice groups as work arises. For the last month, the attorney has been working with the litigation team in various capacities. A recent case involves a young child injured horrifically on a water slide at an amusement park owned by the company where attorney used to work as in house counsel. The law firm has been hired to represent the child and the child's family in an action against the amusement park company for negligent hiring of the water slide operator. Taking care not to use or reveal any confidential client information of the amusement park, the attorney assists the law firm with a representation of the adjacent property owner. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. No, because there is no substantial risk that the attorney has confidential information relevant to the action. B. No, because an attorney is permitted to work outside of her designated Practice Group. C. Yes, because the negligent hiring action is substantially related to the work the attorney did for the employer. D. Yes, because the attorney and the law firm are prohibited from representing both the child and the child's family.

C. Yes, because the negligent hiring action is substantially related to the work the attorney did for the employer.

An attorney represents a client charged with murder. Client insists that he wants to take the stand, claiming to have an alibi. The client claims he was with his sister at the movies when the crime took place. The attorney interviewed the client's sister. At first, the sister did not recall where she was that evening, but later developed a vivid recollection confirming the details of the client's story. The attorney reasonably believes, but is uncertain, that the client and the sister are both lying. The attorney attempts to persuade the client not to take the stand, but the client ignores the attorney's pleas. Must the attorney allow the client to testify about his alibi? A. No, because the attorney is prohibited from offering false evidence in a proceeding. B. No, because the attorney retains the discretion to disallow his client from testifying if the attorney reasonably believes the client intends to provide false testimony. C. Yes, because, in a criminal trial, if the attorney is not certain that the client intends to provide false testimony, then the question of whether to testify in one's own defense is reserved to the client. D. Yes, because the duty not to offer false evidence does not apply to the testimony of criminal defendants.

C. Yes, because, in a criminal trial, if the attorney is not certain that the client intends to provide false testimony, then the question of whether to testify in one's own defense is reserved to the client. (3.3(a)(3))

An attorney had represented a client, who was a developer, for more than a year on a large complicated development project. The attorney recently became concerned about the adequacy of the disclosures that the client planned to make to regulatory agencies and to individuals who soon would be signing contracts with the client. The attorney advised the client that the attorney thought the client's disclosures might be viewed as fraudulent and asked the client to issue supplemental disclosures. The client refused, saying that it did not think its disclosures were fraudulent and that it was a business risk that the client was willing to take. After thinking about this answer, the attorney did not want to continue representing the client. Accordingly, the attorney notified the client that the attorney was resigning from the representation and that the client should hire another lawyer. The attorney agreed to work with the client's new lawyer to protect the client's interests. After receiving the attorney's letter, the client called the attorney and said that the client refused to accept the attorney's resignation. The client stated that the client would be materially prejudiced if the attorney resigned because the client would have to pay to educate another lawyer on everything that had happened to date and because the attorney's departure might put the development project at risk because the people would wonder why the attorney had left. The attorney resigned anyway. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A) Yes, because the resignation would have a material adverse effect on the interests of the client. B) Yes, because the attorney did not have actual knowledge that the client was engaged in criminal or fraudulent conduct. C) No, because permission of a tribunal was not required. D) No, because the attorney and the client had a fundamental disagreement about how much disclosure was necessary.

D) No, because the attorney and the client had a fundamental disagreement about how much disclosure was necessary. (see 1.16(b)(4))

An attorney is admitted in State A and works in the State A office of a law firm that has offices in States A and B. The law firm's office in State B does not have any litigators; the only firm lawyers who are licensed by State B are lawyers who handle complicated (and esoteric) regulatory issues. On one occasion when a law firm client was sued for breach of contract in State B, the law firm asked the attorney to handle the State B litigation matter for the law firm client. The attorney filed a petition to appear pro hac vice in the State B case and expected the application to be granted. While the pro hac vice petition was still pending, the attorney traveled to State B where she interviewed trial witnesses and prepared documents to be used during the trial. As expected, the pro hac vice application was granted two weeks later. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A) Yes, because the attorney's presence in State B will be systematic and continuous during the lengthy trial. B) Yes, because the attorney conducted work in State B before receiving permission to appear pro hac vice. C) No, because the attorney's law firm has an office in State B. D) No, because the attorney reasonably expected to be admitted pro hac vice by the State B court.

D) No, because the attorney reasonably expected to be admitted pro hac vice by the State B court. (see 5.5(c)(2))

An attorney seeking to build a client base posts a flyer on a community bulletin board in a local library. The flyer states the attorney's name, office address, telephone number, and law school of graduation. The flyer also states: "I am an attorney specializing in wills and estate planning. You can find me sitting on the bench outside the library front door." All information on the flyer is factually accurate. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A) Yes, because the rules prohibit attorneys from soliciting potential clients in public places such as libraries. B) Yes, because the rules prohibit attorneys from posting advertising on community bulletin boards. C) No, unless a library patron files a complaint with the disciplinary authority. D) No, because the content of the advertisement is not false or misleading and it contains required information including contact info.

D) No, because the content of the advertisement is not false or misleading and it contains required information including contact info. (Rule 7.2)

An attorney agreed to represent a plaintiff in a personal injury matter. The original agreement between the attorney and the plaintiff specified a 30% contingent fee, which was a reasonable fee for the type of cases the attorney handled. One year into the litigation, the attorney noted that he was extremely busy and that many potential clients sought his services. As a result, the attorney raised his standard fee to a 35% contingent fee, which was also a reasonable fee. The attorney's agreement with the plaintiff was silent on the possibility of a fee increase. He approached the plaintiff and proposed that she agree to modify the contingent fee percentage from 30% to 35%. The attorney informed the plaintiff that if she did not agree, the attorney would find her another experienced personal injury lawyer at the original fee, but that the attorney was unwilling to continue the representation unless the fee was modified. The plaintiff reluctantly agreed to modify the fee agreement as the attorney proposed. Subsequently, the plaintiff's case was settled. The plaintiff, however, refused to pay the attorney more than the 30% contingent fee, and the attorney sued the plaintiff to recover under the modified fee agreement. (https://www.studyblue.com/#flashcard/view/20896348 - check pdf in outlines folder) Is the attorney likely to prevail? A) Yes, because the attorney offered to find the plaintiff another experienced personal injury lawyer at the original rate. B) Yes, because a contingent fee of 35% constituted a reasonable fee. C) No, because the attorney did not suggest that the plaintiff seek the advice of independent counsel before accepting the increased fee. D) No, because there were no special circumstances justifying the attorney's insistence on a fee increase.

D) No, because there were no special circumstances justifying the attorney's insistence on a fee increase. (the lawyer pressured the client)

A witness was subpoenaed to appear and testify at a state legislative committee hearing. The witness retained Attorney to represent her at the hearing. During the hearing, Attorney, reasonably believing that it was in the witness's best interest not to answer, advised the witness not answer certain questions on the grounds that the witness had a constitutional right not to answer. The committee chairperson directed the witness to answer and cautioned her that refusal to answer was a misdemeanor and that criminal prosecution would be instituted if she did not answer. Upon Attorney's advice, the witness persisted in her refusal to answer. The witness was subsequently convicted for her refusal to answer. Is Attorney subject to discipline? A) Yes, because Attorney's advice to the witness was not legally sound. B) Yes, because the witness, in acting on Attorney's advice, committed a crime. C) No, if the offense the witness committed did not involve moral turpitude. D) No, if Attorney reasonably believed the witness had a legal right to refuse to answer the questions.

D) No, if Attorney reasonably believed the witness had a legal right to refuse to answer the questions. (being wrong does not mean being incompetent. 1.1 requires legal knowledge "reasonably necessary for the representation")

For 3 months, an atty has represented a local manufacturing company in a contracts dispute with the company's landlord. Last week, an employee of the manufacturing company asked the attorney to represent the employee in an action against the manufacturing company for failing to comply with wage and hour laws. The contract dispute and the wage and hour matter have no common issues of law or fact, and the attorney reasonably believes that he can competently represent the clients in the respective matters. Without discussing it with the manufacturing company, the attorney accepts and begins representation of the employee in the wage and hour matter. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A) No, because the attorney reasonably believes that he can represent both the company and the employee competently in the respective matters. B) No, because there are no common issues of law or fact in the respective lawsuits. C) Yes, because the attorney did not terminate the representation of the company before agreeing to represent the employee. D) Yes, because the attorney's representation of the employee is directly adverse to the manufacturing company.

D) Yes, because the attorney's representation of the employee is directly adverse to the manufacturing company. (no informed consent here, this is directly adverse, irrelevant that the matters are unrelated)

Client was an experienced oil and gas developer who asked the attorney to represent it in a suit to establish that the client owned certain oil and gas royalties. The client did not have the money to pay the attorney's reasonable hourly rate, so the client proposed to pay attorney the attorney 20% of the value of the proceeds received from the first year royalties that the client may recover. The lawyer agreed and they put the agreement in writing. Is the atty subject to discipline? A. Yes, because the agreement gave attorney a pecuniary interest in Client's cause of action. B. Yes, unless the fee attorney receives does not exceed that which attorney would have received by charging a reasonable hourly rate. C. No, because client, rather than attorney, proposed the fee arrangement. D. No, because attorney may contract with client for a reasonable contingent fee.

D. No, because attorney may contract with client for a reasonable contingent fee. (1.5(c))

A criminal defense atty decides to use publicly available police report data for contacting former clients who might need legal representation. The lawyer sends the following text message to all former clients with cell phone numbers available, whether from the lawyer's records or the police records. "Do you need a lawyer? Police records show you were arrested last night. I have represented you before, and I am available to help you. Reply to this test 24/7 for more information" Is the attorney subject to discipline for contacting former clients by text in this way? A. Yes, if the attorney has any reason to believe that the former client has another lawyer. B. Yes, because the attorney would be soliciting legal business from a person who is not a current client. C. No, because the solicitation by text is always permissible. D. No, because the attorney is soliciting former clients.

D. No, because the attorney is soliciting former clients. 7.3(b)(2) -- also this is not live person to person contact according to comment 2.

An attorney represents a client charged with murder. When interviewing the client about what happened, the client says "I hope they don't find out about that other murder I did in Virginia. If they do, they'll put me on death row if they find me guilty now." At the attorney's request, the client then gives the details about the other murder. The attorney does some surfing on the internet and finds out another person has been convicted of that murder in Virginia and is awaiting execution. The attorney discloses the information to the authorities. Eventually the person convicted of that murder is released, and the client is convicted and sentenced to death. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. Yes, because the attorney caused the death of the client. B. Yes, because the death of the other person convicted was not reasonably certain. C. No, because the attorney was required to disclose to prevent the death of another. D. No, because the attorney was permitted to disclose to prevent a death of another.

D. No, because the attorney was permitted to disclose to prevent a death of another. (1.6(b)(1)) - but the atty client privilege would prohibit the atty from testifying C. is not right because disclosure is not required

After a long trial, a jury awarded the plaintiff a large sum of money in an employment discrimination suit. The attorney for the defendant former employer interview the jurors to get a sense of why they awarded such a large sum to the plaintiff. The attorneys communication was cordial and truthful. The communication was not prohibited by law or a court order. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. Yes, because ex parte Communications with jurors are not permitted. B. Yes, because the judge did not expressly permit the communication. C. No, because the rules do not regulate communication with jurors after a proceeding is over. D. No, because the communication was cordial and truthful and not prohibited by law or a court order.

D. No, because the communication was cordial and truthful and not prohibited by law or a court order. a. 3.5(c)

A lawyer was sued by a client for negligently handling a case, and so the lawyer called a nationally recognized malpractice defense attorney The defense attorney informed the lawyer being sued about the hourly fee, and the lawyer thought it was high but agreed to it anyway. The defense atty forgot to follow up with a letter documenting their conversation, but continued to work on the case and resolved it after several months and sent a bill to the lawyer accurately reflecting the fees and expenses which were reasonable. Did the defense attorney violate rule 1.5? A. Yes, because the hourly rate was not disclosed prior to commencement of the representation. B. Yes, because the defense attorney did not document the conversation about fees and expenses in writing. C. No, because the defense attorney successfully handled the representation. D. No, because the defense disclosed the basis of her fee within a reasonable time after commencing the representation.

D. No, because the defense disclosed the basis of her fee within a reasonable time after commencing the representation. (in rule 1.5) B -- writing is only preferable under 1.5

A legal services lawyer represents a client in eviction proceedings. The client needs to buy new shoes for a child to go to school. Which of the following actions is proper? A. The lawyer buys the shoes for the child. B. The lawyer gives the client money to buy the shoes for the child. C. All of the above D. None of the above.

D. None of the above (1.8(e) prohibits both of these, this do not fall under the exceptions → don't want lawyers to encourage unnecessary litigation)

A construction company's equipment and crew were involved in an accident in which a bystander was injured. The company notified its insurer, which retained an atty to defend the company when the bystander sued. Unknown to the company, based on info disclosed by the company to the atty, the atty correctly advised the insurer that it had no obligation to provide coverage because the construction company had made a misrepresentation in its insurance application. The insurer subsequently sought a declaratory judgment relieving it of responsibility to the construction company. Is the atty subject to discipline? A. No, because the attorney was permitted to disclose the construction company's misrepresentation to the insurer to protect it from prejudice. B. No, because the attorney was permitted to share the company's confidential information with the insurer, which paid for the attorney's services. C. Yes, because an attorney may not represent two clients at the same time. D. Yes, because the attorney acted adversely to the construction company.

D. Yes, because the attorney acted adversely to the construction company. (1.7(a)(1) was representing both insured and insurer)

A father and his two adult children, a son and a daughter, retained an attorney for business purposes. Later, the father had the attorney draft the father's will, which the father signed in the presence of his children. A month later, at the father's request, the attorney drafted a new will that was less favorable to the daughter, and the father directed the attorney not to tell his daughter about it. The father subsequently executed the new will, and neither the son nor the daughter were present. Several weeks later, the daughter consulted the attorney regarding her estate plan. The daughter assumed that her father's earlier will was in effect, and she made estate plan decisions based on that assumption. The attorney provided the daughter legally correct advice in light of the information provided by the daughter. The attorney did not disclose that the father had executed a will that was less favorable to her. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. No, because the attorney followed the father's instructions not to tell the daughter about the second will. B. No, because the attorney provided legally correct advice to the daughter. C. Yes, because the attorney did not tell the daughter about the father's new will. D. Yes, because the attorney did not withdraw from representing the daughter regarding her estate planning.

D. Yes, because the attorney did not withdraw from representing the daughter regarding her estate planning. (should have withdrawn because the representation was materially limited bc the lawyer was not allowed to tell the daughter something crucial)

An attorney represents a criminal D charged with racketeering. The atty called a witness, who testified that D was not a member of an organized crime family of which the witness was a member. During the break, the witness openly admitted to the attorney that he lied under oath and that, in fact, the D was a member of the organized crime family, but the witness insisted that the attorney not disclose the information to anyone. The attorney tried to persuade the witness to disclose his lie to the court, but the witness refused. Must the attorney disclose the perjury to the tribunal? A. No, because the perjury related to a statement of a witness and not a statement of the client. B. No, because the witness did not consent to the attorney's disclosure of the perjury. C. Yes, because the information is not protected by the attorney's duty of confidentiality. D. Yes, because the attorney has learned that the witness has perpetrated a fraud on a tribunal.

D. Yes, because the attorney has learned that the witness has perpetrated a fraud on a tribunal. a. 3.3(a)(3)

The court appointed a criminal defense attorney to represent a man who has been charged with contempt of court for violating a domestic violence restraining order. The order prohibited the man from visiting or communicating with his ex-girlfriend in any way. the ex-girlfriend claimed that the man had violated the order by calling her several times to beg her to resume their relationship. The attorney questioned the man, who vehemently denied violating the restraining order. Uncertain about whether to believe him, the attorney phoned the ex-girlfriend, identifying himself as "the court appointed attorney," and asked her if she was represented by counsel. The ex-girlfriend responded that she was not represented by counsel but asked, "what do you mean by court appointed attorney?" to which the attorney responded, "the court ordered me to represent your ex boyfriend." After discussing the facts surrounding the contempt order, the ex-girlfriend asked, "what do you think I should do?" the attorney paused for a moment and honestly responded, "I'm not your attorney but I don't think you want to be responsible for putting your ex boyfriend behind bars." Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. No, because the attorney's statements reflected his honest views. B. No, because the attorney clarified his role vis-a-vis his client. C. Yes, because the attorney implied that he was disinterested. D. Yes, because the attorney should not have given advice to the ex-girlfriend.

D. Yes, because the attorney should not have given advice to the ex-girlfriend. a. Rule 4.3

An attorney is a well-known patent litigator who often defends cases in a bench trial and who strives to maintain good relationships with judges. Once, the attorney received an unsolicited letter from a judge, whom the attorney happened to know well. In that letter, the judge praised the quality of the litigators briefing and argument. At a meeting with a prospective client, the attorney boasted about this letter and said, "I can tell you that if you retain me, you will be guaranteed to be represented by an attorney who not only has fans on the bench but he also has some of the tightest relationships with many of the judge is deciding patent cases. Many of them are my good friends and go out of their way to rule my favor." Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. No, because the attorney statements were true. B. No, because the attorney's statements would fail to persuade and impress the reasonable prospective client. C. Yes, because it is inappropriate to refer to private letters from judges to prospective clients. D. Yes, because the attorney stated or implied inability to influence improperly an official.

D. Yes, because the attorney stated or implied inability to influence improperly an official. a. 8.4(e) - defines professional misconduct to state or imply an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official or to achieve results by means that violate the Rules.

An attorney represents a first-time entrepreneur, the child of a close friend, in lease negotiations with a local University for a lab space in the University's new Research Park. The attorney and the entrepreneur executed an engagement letter, in which the entrepreneur agreed to "waive in advance any conflict of interest that might arise in the future." Last week, the president of the University visited the attorney for a consultation. The university wants the attorney to defend it in an action brought by an employee for wrongful termination. The attorney explains the representation of the entrepreneur to the president, who says "no problem." The attorney begins representing the University. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. No, because clients can waive their right to objective future conflicts. B. No, because the lease negotiation and the wrongful termination actions are unrelated matters. C. Yes, because clients cannot waive their right to object to future conflicts. D. Yes, because the entrepreneur has not provided informed consent to the representation.

D. Yes, because the entrepreneur has not provided informed consent to the representation. (see comment 22 to 1.7) No evidence that the attorney explained the material risks. Clients can waive future conflicts, but that waivor is subject to the same test as (b).

An attorney represents a toy manufacturer, who is being sued in a products liability case in the state trial court. The P's lawyer filed a motion to transfer the case to fed. Court but failed to cite a 25yr old state supreme court decision that supported the P's position. Although the manufacturer's attorney was aware of that prior state supreme court decision and knew that it was directly adverse to the client's position, the attorney did not cite that decision in her opposition papers, because the attorney had a good faith basis for arguing that the state supreme court decision should be reversed in light of subsequent legal developments and because the client wished not to cite it. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. No, because it was the responsibility of the plaintiff's lawyer to cite the state supreme court decision that supported the plaintiff's position. B. No, because the manufacturer's attorney had a good faith argument that the state supreme court decision should be reversed. C. Yes, because the client does not have the right to decide whether to cite the state supreme court decision. D. Yes, because the manufacturer's attorney knowingly failed to disclose the directly adverse state supreme court decision after the opposing counsel failed to disclose it.

D. Yes, because the manufacturer's attorney knowingly failed to disclose the directly adverse state supreme court decision after the opposing counsel failed to disclose it. a. 3.3(a)(2)

A mother and her daughter or Partners in a business venture to help develop a software program. Their business is not Incorporated, but is a general partnership, with a partnership agreement. The daughter is the primary creative contributor and the mother is the primary business contributor. The mother wants to retire, but their partnership agreement is unclear about certain issues related to the financial settlement upon dissolution of the partnership. State law is also ambiguous on these issues. The mother and her daughter both agree that they only want a fair split of the partnership's assets but they need help determining what is fair. A good friend has been the attorney for the partnership since its Inception. The attorney has also represented the mother and her Estate Planning and the daughter in the purchase of our first home and in a personal injury suit. The mother and her daughter visit the attorney together and ask whether the attorney can assist with a determination of what is fair. The attorney, reasonably believing he can provide competent and diligent representation, agrees, without discussing the risks of joint representation and the alternative of obtaining separate representation. The attorney provides an engagement letter detailing the scope and cost of the representation, and confirming that the parties "agree to this joint representation." Both the mother and her daughter sign the agreement, and the attorney proceeds with the representation. Is the attorney subject to discipline? A. No, because the attorney has represented the partnership since its Inception. B. No, because both the mother and the daughter agreed that they want a fair distribution, and the attorney reasonably believes he can provide competent and diligent representation. C. Yes, because the attorney previously represented the party's individually as well as the partnership. D. Yes, because the mother and daughter did not provide informed consent to the joint representation.

D. Yes, because the mother and daughter did not provide informed consent to the joint representation. No informed consent here because the risks were not?! explained to them.

A local woman is accused of the gruesome killing of her spouse. The court appointed a public defender Defender to represent her but her family wanted a lawyer in private practice. The family found a local attorney willing to take the case. One of the primary reasons the attorney took the case was for publicity. Even though the alleged murder took place in rural area of the country, the horrific details of the murder have made national headlines. The family of the accused did not have the resources to pay for council. With the consent of the accused, they offered to give the attorney $1000000 from the proceeds of any network movie made about the murder. The attorneys legal assistance drafts and engagement letter detailing the arrangement, including how any expenses will be paid. The assistant send it to the accused, advising her to seek independent legal advice before shining. The accused signs the agreement, after Consulting with another lawyer, and the attorney proceeds with the representation. Is the atty subject to discipline? A. No, because the attorney suggested, and the accused received, advice from another lawyer before signing the agreement. B. No, because the attorney is permitted to enter a business transaction with a client. C. Yes, because 1 million dollars is an unreasonable fee in this case. D. Yes, because this fee agreement is not permitted during representation.

D. Yes, because this fee agreement is not permitted during representation. · 1.8(d)

A lawyer represents a client who was ran over by a car while walking on a crosswalk. The lawyer finds out from a surveillance tape that the client had just exited an adult movie theater with someone who wasn't the client's spouse. Before trial, the atty receives a discovery request demanding the surveillance tapes that are or may be relevant to the action. The attorney refuses to produce the surveillance tap. Is the atty's conduct proper? A) Yes, because the surveillance tape is privileged B) Yes, because producing the surveillance tape would violate the duty of confidentiality. C) No, because the information on the surveillance tape is not privileged, and the attorney must turn over non-privileged information if a lawful demand is made. D) No, because even though the information on the surveillance tape is privileged, the attorney must comply with the discovery request.

Is the atty's conduct proper? A) Yes, because the surveillance tape is privileged - The tape is not privileged because it is not a communication B) Yes, because producing the surveillance tape would violate the duty of confidentiality. - Conflating the ideas again C) No, because the information on the surveillance tape is not privileged, and the attorney must turn over non-privileged information if a lawful demand is made. (correct answer) - Lawyer must turn over the info if it is not privileged. Also 1.6(b)(6) D) No, because even though the information on the surveillance tape is privileged, the attorney must comply with the discovery request. - This tape is not privileged

An atty represents a client in a PI action. Client is in a body cast and claims injuries after a car accident. A month before trial, attorney goes on a skiing vacation. Attorney sees the client without the body cast skiing down the slopes. The D subpoenas the atty to provide information the attorney has about the client's medical condition. The attorney withdrew from the representation and refused to supply any information and invokes the atty client privilege and the duty of confidentiality. Is the attorney's conduct proper? a. Yes, because turning over the information could subject the attorney to discipline for violating rule 1.6. B. Yes, because the privilege means that the atty cannot be forced to testify against the client. C. No, because the information is not a communication and therefore is not protected by the privilege. D. No, because the attorney no longer represents the client.

a. Yes, because turning over the information could subject the attorney to discipline for violating rule 1.6. · The attorney was not subject to discipline because this was complying with other law under 1.6(b)(6). THIS IS A LAWFUL DEMAND B. Yes, because the privilege means that the atty cannot be forced to testify against the client. · Attorney could be forced to testify against the client C. No, because the information is not a communication and therefore is not protected by the privilege. (correct) · There is no communication here, and this visual observation was not the client seeking legal advice. D. No, because the attorney no longer represents the client. · Atty client privilege LASTS BEYOND THE REPRESENTATION