PR Practice Questions – West Academic 2024

25 Questions
Answers and explanations at the end of the document

1. Calvin Client wants you to represent him in a felony prosecution. Your

fee agreement with him provides:

Calvin Client shall pay Lawyer the sum of $15,000 for representation in
the matter of State v Calvin Client. No part of the $15,000 flat fee is
refundable for any reason. Calvin Client understands that the flat fee is
the agreed amount due Lawyer, regardless of the time expended on
the matter or how the matter is resolved.

Client signed the agreement and paid you $15,000. You deposited the
$15,000 in your law firm’s operating account. You reviewed the police report,
left a message for the prosecutor and law enforcement officer, and entered
your appearance on behalf of Calvin Client at his first court appearance the
next day. A few weeks later, before his case was resolved, Client discharged
you and requested an accounting and a partial refund. You refused, stating
that the flat fee was earned when Client paid you.

Do you owe Calvin Client a refund for any or all of the $15,000 he paid you?

A. No. Calvin Client paid the agreed amount, and you owe him no refund,
regardless of what later occurred in his case or the duration of his case.

B. No. You earned the full amount as soon as he paid you.

C. No. Calvin Client discharged you before his case concluded.

D. Yes. A flat fee is refundable to the extent that you neither earn
that fee nor incur expenses.

2. Until two years ago, Lawyer Lubinsky was Special Counsel to the
President of the United States. When the president’s term ended, like her
colleagues Lawyer Lubinsky received many attractive offers of employment.
After extended discussions with family members, Lawyer Lubinsky decided
to do something rather unique. She became Of Counsel for two law firms:
one in New York City and a separate law firm in Los Angeles. All the lawyers
of her New York City law firm recently were disqualified from representing
any of the parties in a product recall by the federal government.
What is the ethical effect of Lawyer Lubinsky’s dual role as Of Counsel for
two law firms on the imputed disqualification of her New York City firm?

A. The imputed disqualification of all the lawyers in the New York City firm
has no effect on the Los Angeles law firm because each firm’s ethical
position is independent of the other.

B. The imputed disqualification of all the lawyers in the New York

City firm has the effect of disqualifying all the lawyers in the Los
Angeles law firm.

C. The imputed disqualification of all the lawyers in the New York City firm
has no effect on the Los Angeles law firm, because a lawyer cannot serve as
Of Counsel for more than one law firm.

D. The imputed disqualification of all the lawyers in the New York City firm
has the effect of disqualifying only the law partners in the Los Angeles law
firm who completed the deal which designated Lawyer Lubinsky as Of
Counsel.

3. Aaron & Boone LLP is a limited liability partnership. The partnership

represents labor unions, union benefit plans, and claimants in workers’
compensation cases. Charles & Dolly, P.C. represents plaintiffs in personal
injury cases, along with workers’ compensation matters. The planned new
partnership of the two law firms is known as Aaron, Boone, Charles & Dolly.

Which of the following statements is accurate?

A. An ongoing conflicts check is necessary for Aaron, Boone, Charles &

Dolly’s new clients only.

B. The conflict of interest of any lawyer in the new firm becomes

the conflict of interest of all the lawyers.

C. Client confidentiality is necessary to obtain a client’s or potential

client’s informed consent to do the required conflict of interest check

D. Aaron, Boone, Charles & Dolly has no concern about the two
predecessor law firms’ past clients.
4. Lawyer Leslie was surprised when one of her biggest family law
competitors, Lawyer Samuels, retained her about an allegation that he had
commingled some of his client escrow accounts with his private funds. At the
time, Lawyer Leslie and Lawyer Samuels have six cases where they are
counsel of record on opposite sides of the case.

In which of the following situations is Lawyer Leslie not subject to discipline?

A. She attacks Lawyer Samuels’s credibility in the divorce cases where he

is counsel of record and she is counsel for the adversary.

B. She tempers her advocacy on behalf of her divorce client in the cases
with Lawyer Samuels so as not to alienate Lawyer Samuels.

C. She is charging Lawyer Samuels a fee that is twenty times the amount
of the total fees she is charging the six divorce clients whose spouses are
represented by Lawyer Samuels.

D. She obtains informed consent from her six divorce clients and
from Lawyer Samuels, who must make full disclosures to his six
divorce clients.

5. Recently, the local sheriff’s department sent you a list (that you
requested) of the people who were arrested during the past week. You
immediately began to contact arrestees by phone to offer whatever general
legal services each of them might need. None of the persons you contacted
is a lawyer or related to you.

Which of the following circumstances constitutes a permissible, ethical

solicitation?

A. Your calls were directed to specific persons, unrelated to you, whom

you knew needed your legal services.

B. Your calls were directed only to specific persons who are

related to you.

C. Your calls were directed to specific persons whom you reasonably

should know needed your legal services and were made for your pecuniary
gain.

D. Your calls were directed to specific persons who previously had

requested not to be contacted by you.
6. You are a lawyer with twenty years of prior law practice experience.
Although you are aware of the Lincoln saying that a “A lawyer who
represents himself has a fool for a client,” you got into a fist fight last week
with a young lawyer at a bar association summer picnic. You immediately
decided to sue the young lawyer for civil battery, seeking almost $10,000 in
damages for your medical care. The young lawyer files a countersuit and is
represented by counsel.

In your role as a pro se plaintiff, can you permissibly contact the young
lawyer to discuss the possibility of settlement?

A. Yes, because Rule 4.2 allows you as a lawyer, even as the party-lawyer
in the case, to contact your adversary without obtaining the consent of your
adversary.

B. Yes, because Rule 4.2 regards your pro se representation differently

than that of a pro senon-lawyer party.

C. No, because Rule 4.2 does not cover communications between one or
more pro se parties.

D. No, Rule 4.2 applies to both pro se lawyers and other pro
se individuals.

7. Lawyer Fitzgerald has represented clients in environmental litigation

for more than twenty years. Her most recent case involved air pollution by a
local rubber manufacturer. Through discussions with her corporate client’s
officers, Lawyer Fitzgerald has learned about a longstanding policy of
ignoring the pollutants emanating from the corporate smokestacks which has
resulted in large increases in the rate of lethal, incurable cancers in the
neighborhoods adjacent to the local manufacturing plant.

With this information, what is Lawyer Fitzgerald’s ethical disclosure

obligation?

A. Must disclose what she knows to the appropriate government

authority.

B. May disclose what she knows in order to save lives.

C. Must not disclose any confidential information learned from her
corporate client.

D. May disclose what she knows to prevent the corporation from going
bankrupt.

8. Lawyer Lemon has a conflict of interest, based upon her representation

of one client in a civil case whose interests are directly adverse to another
client whom she represents in a separate civil case. She believes that both of
her current clients will consent to the conflict, but she is unsure about what
else she needs to resolve.

Which of the following is an in accurate description of a factor which Lawyer

Lemon must consider prior to proceeding with the conflicted representation?

A. She must believe that she can competently and diligently

represent all of her clients affected by the conflict.

B. She must decide whether some other law precludes her from accepting
the conflicting representations.

C. Her representation of the conflicting interests must not involve

representing one client against another in the same litigation.

D. Both clients must agree to the conflicting representations.

9. Recently, following several carjackings, the local police arrested a

suspect, who was indicted for nine counts of theft and nine counts of assault.
A week before the scheduled trial date, Paul Prosecutor held a press
conference that was broadcast live on local television and radio outlets.
During his comments on the upcoming carjacking trial, he refused to
elaborate on the specific charges. However, Paul Prosecutor emphasized that
Defendant was convicted five years earlier for two carjackings and was
paroled from prison on those charges only four weeks before the first of the
carjackings that led to the current charges.

Did Paul Prosecutor’s comments at the public press conference subject him
to discipline?

A. Yes, because his comments would prejudice the defendant’s

trial.
B. Yes, because he cannot make public statements on a pending case.

C. No, because prior criminal convictions are a matter of public record.

D. No, because he has a First Amendment right to inform prospective

jurors in the community about pending cases.

10. LaVerne Smith arrives at Lawyer Larry’s office to tell him about
concerns she has about her job situation. Last summer, she became the
assistant women’s basketball coach at New State College. LaVerne has
overheard several of the older players refer to financial payments from
boosters of the basketball program. LaVerne believes that she should talk to
Shirley Crane, the NCAA compliance officer at the college. As Lawyer Larry
interviews LaVerne, he realizes that two years ago he represented Shirley
when she divorced her first husband. That representation has concluded.

Can Lawyer Larry represent LaVerne?

A. Lawyer Larry can represent LaVerne, only because her case is factually
different from Shirley’s earlier divorce case.

B. Lawyer Larry can represent LaVerne, only if Lawyer Larry does not use
information relating to his former representation of Shirley to her
disadvantage.

C. Lawyer Larry can represent LaVerne, if Lawyer Larry does not

use information relating to his former representation of Shirley to
her disadvantage because her case is unrelated and factually
different from Shirley’s earlier divorce case.

D. Lawyer Larry cannot represent LaVerne, because he has represented

Shirley within the last two years.

11. Lawyer Schurman represents plaintiffs in civil litigation. At a pretrial

conference conducted prior to the settlement of a client’s case, Lawyer
Schurman was opposing a summary judgment motion filed by the opposing
party. In preparing to oppose the summary judgment motion, Lawyer
Schurman became aware of several cases with dicta directly against his
client’s legal position but did not disclose the cases to the court or opposing
counsel.
What is Lawyer Schurman’s ethical obligation, if any, as to the cases he
found?

A. Lawyer Schurman has no ethical obligation to disclose cases

that he believes contain only dicta.

B. Lawyer Schurman’s ethical obligation is that he must disclose the

cases in his response to the summary judgment motion and a later
disclosure is never allowed.

C. Lawyer Schurman’s ethical obligation is to disclose the cases to the

court and to elaborate on their adverse implications for his client.

D. Lawyer Schurman’s ethical obligation is to disclose the cases to the

court without undue delay.

12. Prosperous Perot, who is one of Lawyer Smith’s regular clients, asks
Lawyer Smith to file a suit against the United States Government seeking to
have the federal budget declared unconstitutional. Lawyer Smith advised
Prosperous Perot that the suit is baseless, but Lawyer Smith finally agreed to
file the suit on receipt of a $100,000 retainer.

Is Lawyer Smith subject to discipline?

A. Yes, because it is unethical to present a claim not warranted

under existing law unless it can be supported by a good faith
argument for reversal, or modification, or extension of existing law.

B. Yes, because no portion of the fee was earned when Lawyer Smith
accepted the retainer.

C. No, because Lawyer Smith fully advised Prosperous Perot that the suit
was baseless and Prosperous Perot paid the retainer after giving informed
consent confirmed in writing.

D. No, if a fee in these circumstances is reasonable.

13. One of the prestigious lawyers in the community is Lawyer Ballantine,

who has been appointed by the court to represent an accused rapist who is
indigent.

Lawyer Ballantine:
A. Should refuse to take the case if he has read about the case in
newspapers and believes the defendant is probably guilty.

B. May refuse to take the case if doing so would hurt his reputation,
because a lawyer’s reputation is his stock in trade.

C. Should take the case unless it requires him to align himself against
influential members of the community.

D. Should not take the case if the intensity of his personal feeling
may impair the effective representation of the prospective client.

14. Which of the following is true about advertising and solicitation under
the Model Rules of Professional Conduct?

A. All in-person solicitations for pecuniary gain are prohibited.

B. Targeted mailings to those known to be in need of legal services are

always permitted.

C. Lawyers cannot compare their services with those of other

lawyers because such comparisons cannot be substantiated.

D. Advertisements must contain the name of at least one person who is

responsible for the ad.

15. Which of the following statements is true about lawyer discipline?

A. Under the Model Rules of Professional Conduct, a lawyer who is

convicted of a felony must be disciplined.

B. A lawyer who knows that another lawyer has violated any Rule of
Professional Conduct must report it. Failure to do so may subject the non-
reporting lawyer to discipline, unless the information is protected by the
rules on confidentiality.

C. The duty to report the violation of a Rule of Professional

Conduct by another lawyer is limited to offenses that raise a
substantial question about the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or
fitness as a lawyer. Failure to report may subject the non-reporting
lawyer to discipline, unless the information is protected by the rules
on confidentiality.

D. None of the above answers is correct.

16. Attorney defended Jones in a criminal assault case. Before trial, Jones
told Attorney in confidence that he beat up the victim without provocation.
After the jury found Jones not guilty and Jones refused to pay Attorney’s fee,
Attorney wrote to Jones as follows: “The jury found you not guilty, but your
victim can still sue you for civil damages. If you do not pay my fee, and if I
have to sue you to collect it, I will have to reveal the whole truth in open
court, to explain why the amount of my fee is reasonable. Think this over
carefully. I hope to receive your check by return mail.”

Which of the following is the most correct statement of the ethical rules in
this case?

A. Even though heavy-handed, Attorney’s letter was proper because he

was simply explaining to Jones the consequences of refusing to pay the fee.

B. If Attorney sues Jones to collect the fee, Attorney will be

subject to discipline because a lawyer is prohibited from using a
civil suit to collect a fee.

C. If Attorney sues Jones to collect the fee, Attorney may reveal Jones’s
confidential communications, but only to the extent necessary to establish
his claim against Jones.

D. Attorney’s letter was proper because a lawyer is required to settle fee

disputes amicably if possible.

17. In a non-litigation matter:

A. A lawyer may withdraw if the representation will result in a violation of

the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law.

B. A lawyer must withdraw if the client has used the lawyer’s services to
perpetrate a crime or fraud.

C. A lawyer may withdraw if the representation will result in an

unreasonable financial burden on the lawyer, but only if the
withdrawal can be accomplished without having a material adverse
effect on the interest of the client.

D. A lawyer may withdraw if the client persists in a course of action

involving the lawyer’s services that the lawyer reasonably believes is
criminal.

18. Attorney Bob Cranfill represents Andrew Kuhn at his sentencing

hearing following his criminal conviction. The pre-sentence report indicates
that Andrew has no prior criminal record, and the trial judge asks Andrew
whether that is true. After Andrew confirms the information in the pre-
sentence report, the trial judge places Andrew on probation. Attorney Cranfill
knows from an independent inquiry and from questioning Andrew that
Andrew does have a criminal record and that the pre-sentence report is
incorrect.

When Judge Wrigley asks Attorney Cranfill whether he has anything to say,
does Attorney Cranfill have an ethical obligation to correct the record?

A. No, because Attorney Cranfill would violate his duty of confidentiality if

he disclosed the information about Andrew’s prior record.

B. Yes, because Andrew has committed perjury which can be imputed to

Attorney Cranfill.

C. No, because Andrew made the false statement, not Attorney Cranfill.

D. Yes, because Attorney Cranfill is prohibited from offering

evidence that he knows to be false and from making a false
statement of material fact to a tribunal.

19. When Lawyer Simon represented Hyman in connection with a murder

investigation ten years ago, the investigation proved inconclusive, Hyman
was never formally charged, and Lawyer Simon’s representation of Hyman
ended. Currently, Lawyer Simon represents Client Burlingame in a child
custody dispute. Burlingame tells Lawyer Simon in confidence about a
murder committed ten years ago by a person named Hyman, who was
helped after the murder by her ex-husband. The details offered by
Burlingame make it clear to Lawyer Simon that her former client Hyman did
commit the murder.

What is Lawyer Simon’s ethical disclosure obligation?

A. Lawyer Simon must keep the information in confidence unless
Burlingame consents to have it revealed.

B. Lawyer Simon must reveal the information to the police because

Hyman’s evasion of the law is a continuing crime.

C. Lawyer Simon may reveal the information to the prosecutor without

the consent of either Hyman or Burlingame, provided that he asks the
prosecutor not to disclose the source of the information.

D. If there is no statute of limitations on the crime of murder, Lawyer

Simon may reveal Burlingame’s information to the police without her
consent.

20. Lawyer Lanier interviewed Client Cal about probating the will of Client
Cal’s sister. Client Cal disclosed to Lawyer Lanier he knew about three wills
that his sister had written. After reading all three wills, Lawyer Lanier told
Client Cal that he would realize the greatest benefit from the second will.
With Lawyer Lanier’s assistance, Client Cal then submitted his sister’s
second will for probate without disclosing to the Probate Judge any
information about the other two wills.

Which of the following best describes Lawyer Lanier’s situation?

A. Lawyer Lanier is subject to discipline for presenting a will for

probate without disclosing the existence of a later will.

B. Lawyer Lanier is not subject to discipline because no one can have

more than one will.

C. Lawyer Lanier is not subject to discipline because all three wills were
more or less identical.

D. Answers B and C are both true.

21. Lawyer Lackey has been practicing with the firm of Osborne and Glick.
His practice has grown in maritime law. In the beginning, his maritime clients
were clients of the law firm but as his reputation grew, a large number of
new clients came to the firm because of Lawyer Lackey. He now has decided
to leave his firm to practice alone.
Which of the following best describes how the legal needs of Lawyer
Lackey’s current clients will be met?

A. The clients who belonged to Osborne and Glick when Lawyer Lackey
arrived must stay with that firm, and the rest of the clients can decide
whether to go with Lawyer Lackey or stay with Osborne and Glick.

B. The clients who came to Osborne and Glick after Lawyer Lackey
arrived must go with Lawyer Lackey to his new firm, but the other clients can
decide for themselves whether to go with Lawyer Lackey or stay with
Osborne and Glick.

C. All of Lawyer Lackey’s clients can decide for themselves which

lawyer or law firm to use for legal services.

D. None of Lawyer Lackey’s clients at Osborne and Glick can be his clients
after he leaves that firm.

22. Lawyer Harriet is a solo practitioner who represents Client Charlie in a

breach of contract case. Yesterday, the opposing side sent twenty
interrogatories calling for detailed responses; the interrogatories must be
answered within thirty days under the Rules of Civil Procedure for that state.
Lawyer Harriet receives those interrogatories just before leaving town for a
four-week vacation in Mexico.

Which, if any, of the following describes Lawyer Harriet’s ethical obligation?

A. Lawyer Harriet is subject to discipline if she never sends the

interrogatories to Client Charlie for him to assist in answering.

B. Lawyer Harriet is subject to discipline if she waits to return from her

vacation to forward the interrogatories to Client Charlie.

C. Lawyer Harriet is subject to discipline if she does not send the

interrogatories to Client Charlie and instead answers them, although she
knows that her information in Client Charlie’s files cannot satisfactorily
comply with the requests for information.

D. Answers A, B and C are correct.

23. Lawyer Ben has been litigating personal injury cases, but he is not yet
comfortable with many of the new customs and practices regarding
technology. In fact, sometimes he becomes confused when faxing
information to his client and to the opposing counsel in some of his cases.
For example, last week when he intended to fax important correspondence
between himself and Client Daniels, instead he accidentally included those
documents in a bundle of papers which he faxed to opposing counsel,
Lawyer Brandon, as answers to interrogatories. It is clear to Brandon that
these documents were not intended to be seen by him.

What, if any, obligation does Lawyer Brandon have upon receiving the
privileged documents from Lawyer Ben?

A. Lawyer Brandon is subject to discipline if he fails to inform Lawyer Ben

immediately.

B. Lawyer Brandon is subject to discipline if he returns the documents

unread to Lawyer Ben.

C. Lawyer Brandon is subject to discipline if he forwards the documents to

Client Daniels.

D. A and C are both correct answers.

24. The law firm of Able, Baker and Cohen realizes that its client base is
getting older and that the firm must find new ways to attract clients. The
firm has decided to develop clients by experimenting with solicitation of
clients.

Which of the following solicitation approaches will result in the law firm
partners being subject to discipline under the Rules?

A. The law firm partners can solicit other lawyers for new business.

B. The law firm partners can contact their family members and close
friends for new business.

C. The law firm partners may contact their former clients for new
business.

D. Answers A, B, and C are correct.

25. Plaintiff Lawyer Lotz represents Client Clore in a car accident case in
which the defendant’s liability is clear. The only issue is the extent of Client
Clore’s damages, including a back injury. Client Clore admits to her that a
year before the car accident, he had hurt his back in a fall at his friend’s
house. Yesterday, Client Clore admitted to Lawyer Lotz that a year before the
car accident, he had hurt his back in a fall at his friend’s house. Client Clore
tell her that he never made a claim for the earlier injury and had not said
anything about it because he was afraid it would ruin this case. Client Clore
tells Lawyer Lotz that he will pursue the case no matter what and that he
does not want to disclose the prior accident or injury.

What is Lawyer Lotz’s best course of action under the Rules?

A. Lawyer Lotz must disclose Client Clore’s fraud if her failure to do so will
assist Client Clore in perpetrating a fraud with substantial financial injury to
the insurance company.

B. Lawyer Lotz may disclose Client Clore’s fraud if her failure to

do so will assist Client Clore in perpetrating a fraud on the
insurance company that will result in substantial financial injury.

C. Lawyer Lotz must not disclose Client Clore’s confidential information.

D. None of the above answers is correct.

----------

Answers

1. D Rule 1.5, Comment 4 states: “A lawyer may require advance

payment of a fee, but is obliged to return any unearned portion. See Rule
1.16(d).” An advance fee paid to you by a client for legal services to be
provided in the future cannot be nonrefundable. Any unearned portion must
be returned to the client. Rule 1.5(a) prohibits you from charging an
unreasonable fee; an example of an unreasonable fee is a flat fee when you
have performed fewer than all of the described or contemplated services.

2. B When any lawyer is disqualified from representing a client,

generally none of the lawyers with whom the disqualified lawyer is affiliated
can represent that client. Rule 1.10. If Lawyer Lubinsky is Of Counsel to
both the New York and the Los Angeles law firms, the conflicts of interest of
each firm are imputed to the other firm.

3. B The conflict of interest check between the three firms is required

because of imputed disqualification under Rule 1.10, which provides (with
very limited exception) that the conflict of one member of a firm becomes
the conflict of all members of a firm. Thus, if an individual is a member of
more than one firm, the conflict of any member of any of the involved firms
becomes the conflict of all the members of the involved firms.

4. D When Lawyer Samuels from another firm retains Lawyer Leslie,

the latter may have a conflict of interest if they concurrently represent
clients who are adverse to each other in separate cases. Despite that
concurrent conflict, Lawyer Leslie may represent Lawyer Samuels if she
“reasonably believes that [she] will be able to provide competent and
diligent representation” to him and to her divorce clients and each of her
clients gives “informed consent, confirmed in writing.” Rule 1.7(b)(1),
1.7(b)(4). Informed consent by all of her affected clients is possible if
Lawyer Leslie insists that Lawyer Samuels make a full disclosure to his
clients. See Rule 1.7, Comment 14.

5. B Rule 7.3(b)(2) enables a lawyer to solicit persons with whom he

has a family relationship.

6. D Under Rule 4.2, if you are a party in a matter and you are
represented by a lawyer, lawyers for others in the matter cannot
communicate with you about the subject of the representation. Instead,
those lawyers must communicate about the matter through your lawyer,
unless the contact is authorized by law or court order or consented to by
your lawyer. However, when you represent yourself pro se, i.e., you as a
lawyer are self-representing, you may want to communicate directly with the
represented person about the matter. It may appear from the language of
Rule 4.2 that the Rule does not apply to you when you represent yourself.
However, both the language of Rule 4.2 and its rationales support a
conclusion that Rule 4.2 applies to you as a pro se lawyer, because pro
selawyers are no different than other pro se individuals. ABA Formal Opinion
502 (2022). Unless you have the consent of the younger lawyer’s lawyer (or
the law or a court order permits communication) to contact her client
directly, you cannot contact him. See ABA Formal Opinion 502 (2022) for a
discussion about the pro se lawyer contacting the opponent’s attorney to
obtain consent for contacting the lawyers’ client.

7. B A lawyer “may reveal information relating to the representation

of a client to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary” to
“prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm.” Rule 1.6(b)
(1). The provision is discretionary, not mandatory. The disclosure is intended
to address future death or bodily harm. (A lawyer cannot disclose client
information that she already has killed or has caused serious harm to
someone. That information is protected by the duty of confidentiality.) The
reference to “certain” death or substantial bodily harm includes imminent,
lingering, and delayed death or bodily harm. Lawyer Fitzgerald may reveal
that her client’s environmental practices and legal violations will likely cause
death to people. Rule 1.6. Comment 6. The reference to “substantial” means
that disclosure of information to prevent serious bodily harm is proper.

8. D Answer D is an incomplete explanation of the nature of the

consent necessary to proceed with the conflicting representations. To
resolve a conflict of interest when the interests of one client are directed
adverse to another client, Rule 1.7(b) has four requirements. Lawyer Lemon
must (1) independently decide whether she can competently and diligently
represent all the affected clients, (2) decide whether some other law
precludes her from accepting the representation, and (3) not represent one
client against another client “in the same litigation,” and (4) each of her
affected clients must give her “informed consent, confirmed in writing.” For a
consent to be “informed,” Lawyer Lemon must explain to each of her
affected clients the “material risks” and “reasonably available alternatives”
of going forward with or without you as her counsel. Rule 1.0(e). It is
insufficient for each of her clients simply to agree to her other
representation. In order for a consent to be informed, it is also possible that
Lawyer Lemon would have to have to disclose to one client confidential
information from the other client. If her other client refuses to permit that
disclosure, no consent can occur and the representation cannot go forward.
Lawyer Lemon’s clients’ consent must be confirmed in writing to impress the
client about the seriousness of the situation.
9. A Under Rule 3.6(a), as a prosecutor you must not make a public
statement outside the courtroom which you reasonably should know would
have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing the case. Your
comments revealed damaging information that the trial judge probably
would not have admitted as evidence been at trial. In addition, your
extrajudicial comments violated Rule 3.8(f),because they had a substantial
likelihood of raising public condemnation of the defendant.

10. C This describes both of the conditions necessary for Lawyer Larry
to represent LaVerne in discussions with Shirley. Under Rule 1.9(a), a
lawyer who has previously represented a client must not represent another
person in the same or a substantially related matter in which that person’s
interests are materially adverse to the interests of the prior client. In
addition, under Rule 1.9(c), a lawyer cannot use information relating to the
former representation for the disadvantage of the former client. Lawyer Larry
represented the college’s compliance officer two years ago in her divorce.
Because LaVerne is asking Lawyer Larry to discuss her job situation with
Shirley, there does not appear to be any possibility that the current
representation relates to the same or a substantially related matter under
Rule 1.9(a) as Shirley’s divorce action. On the other hand, Rule 1.9(c)
prohibits him from using any information he obtained about Shirley during
that representation to her disadvantage, regardless of whether he learned it
from Shirley or others, unless that information is generally known.

11. D Under Rule 3.3(a)(2), an attorney must “disclose to the tribunal

legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be
directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing
counsel.” Lawyer Schurman’s obligation is to disclose the cases; he does not
have to elaborate on the adverse implications of the cases for his client, and
he instead may argue that the adverse cases were decided incorrectly or are
distinguishable on their facts.

12. A Per Rule 3.1, when a lawyer, like Lawyer Smith, agrees to be the
advocate for a client, she may present any nonfrivolous interpretation of the
law that favors her client. She cannot present frivolous claims, defenses, or
motions. She does not have to make a complete factual or legal investigation
before asserting a claim, defense or motion, but she is acting frivolously
when as here she knowingly puts forth a position unsupported by the facts
and the law.

13. D Under the authority of Rule 6.2, there are types of cases that a
lawyer must decline, such as when she is too busy, or when the case is
frivolous or is brought to harass another. She should not refuse a court
appointment in a pro bono case except for “compelling reasons” or for “good
cause.” One example of good cause occurs if the representation “is likely to
result in a violation of the Rules . . . or other law,” such as a conflict of
interest with another client. Lawyer Ballantine may decline the
representation if her feelings are so strong that she could not do a
competent job. Rule 6.2(c).

14. D A lawyer must include the name and office address of at least
one lawyer or her law firm responsible for the content of any such
communication. Rule 7.2(d). Generally, in-person, live telephone, and real-
time electronic (as with chat rooms or instant messaging) solicitations of a
prospective client are prohibited when the lawyer’s significant motive is her
own compensation. However, there are exceptions. A lawyer may solicit
another lawyer for business. Rule 7.3(b)(1). She also can contact family
members who are in need of legal services, as well as people with whom she
has a close personal relationship. A lawyer cannot solicit professional
employment from a prospective client in person or through any form of
communication (e.g., a targeted mailing), either when that person has made
known to the lawyer the prospective client’s desire not to be solicited by the
lawyer or when the solicitation involves coercion, duress, or harassment.
Rule 7.3(c). Lawyers may compare their services with those of other lawyers.
However, if a lawyer’s ad provides an unsubstantiated comparison of her
legal services to others, the ad may be misleading if it is “presented with
such specificity as would lead a reasonable person to conclude that the
comparison can be substantiated.” Rule 7.1, Comment 3.

15. C The scope of the duty to report misconduct does not include a
duty to report any and all misconduct; the obligation to report requires that
the lawyer report only those violations that raise “a substantial question”
about the other lawyer’s “honesty, trustworthiness or fitness” as a
lawyer. Rule 8.3(a). The duty imposed by Rule 8.3(a) is superseded by the
duty of confidentiality under Rule 1.6, as when a lawyer’s client tells her that
another lawyer has engaged in serious misconduct, or she represents a
lawyer who has himself committed serious misconduct.

16. C A lawyer may disclose confidential information if she reasonably

believes that disclosure is necessary to sue her client for an unpaid fee, or to
defend a malpractice, disciplinary, or criminal charge. Rule 1.6(b)(5). Here,
Attorney has the discretion to disclose confidential information to establish
that her client owes her a fee, as well as the amount of the fee. If her client
fails to pay her after she has rendered services for him, she may sue him for
the fee he still owes and disclose confidential information if he defends the
fee action by attacking her representation.

17. D Under Rule 1.16(b)(2), a lawyer may withdraw if her client

persists in a course of action that she reasonably believes is criminal or
fraudulent. A is wrong because the duty to withdraw is mandatory, not
permissive, if the representation will result in a rules violation. B is wrong
because there is no duty to withdraw for this reason, it is permissive. C is
wrong because the second condition is not required.

18. D To prevent the tribunal from being misled by false statements,

counsel must correct any statement of fact that she learns was both false
and material to the proceeding. Rule 3.3(a)(1). Significantly, the “failure to
make a disclosure is the equivalent of an affirmative misrepresentation.”
Rule 3.3, Comment 3. When Attorney Cranfill realizes that Andrew is lying to
the tribunal, she must take action to correct that fraud/perjury. Even though
the information from Andrew about his criminal record is protected by the
lawyer-client privilege and the information from her own inquiry generally is
protected by the ethical duty of confidentiality, Attorney Cranfill here must
disclose that information to prevent Andrew from misleading the court by
confirming the erroneous information in the pre-sentence investigation.

19. A The lawyer’s obligation to preserve her client’s confidential

information generally survives the end of her lawyer-client relationship with
the client. Rules 1.6, Comment 18; 1.9(c)(2). The confidential information
cannot be disclosed by the lawyer without the client’s consent. That duty
also survives the death of the lawyer’s client.

20. A Lawyer Lanier is subject to discipline because her omission of

any reference to the later will constitutes a misrepresentation under Rule
3.3. By presenting only the second will for probate, Lawyer Lanier in effect is
falsely stating that this will 1) is the only will prepared by Client Cal’s sister,
and 2) if there were more than will that she wrote, this is the most recent
will.

21. C Rule 5.6 generally prohibits agreements that restrict a lawyer’s

right to practice after leaving his law firm. A lawyer cannot offer or make a
contract restricting his right to practice law after the termination of the
relationship created by a partnership, operating, shareholder, or employment
agreement. Rule 5.6(a). It also is clear from the case law that Osborne and
Glick cannot bind departing lawyers like Lawyer Lackey to leave clients
behind. Similarly, Lawyer Lackey cannot promise their firms not to take
clients along when he leaves. Clients do not belong to a lawyer who does
most or all of their legal representation or to the lawyer’s law firm. The
decision about who will represent a client when Lawyer Lackey leaves
Osborne and Glick belongs exclusively to each client. Each client may choose
to be represented by Lawyer Lackey, Osborne and Glick, neither, or both.

22. D A lawyer’s obligation to her client includes the obligation to

“keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the matter.” Rule
1.4(a)(3). Unless he has told his lawyer not to communicate such
information, a lawyer should inform her about what she and the opposition
have done in his case, judicial rulings and, consistent with Rule 1.2,
settlement offers from the opposing party. Because the interrogatories in
this fact pattern call for detailed information, it is unlikely that she would be
able to answer them based on what is in her office files about Client Charlie’s
case. If she waits until her return from a four-week vacation to send the
interrogatories to Client Charlie, there will be only two days left before the
deadline has expired. Because of the nature of the information being sought
by the other side, Lawyer Harriet cannot delay forwarding the interrogatories
to him. It is unreasonable for Lawyer Harriet to fail to communicate with
Client Charlie by sending the interrogatories to him when she knows that the
information in her office files cannot satisfactorily comply with the
information sought by those interrogatories.

23. D If a lawyer receives a document relating to a representation and

the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the document was
delivered to him inadvertently, he must inform the sender promptly. Rule
4.4(b). Lawyer Ben’s duty to maintain confidentiality extends to accidental
or inadvertent disclosure of confidential information, as when Lawyer Ben
accidentally sends a misdirected fax to Lawyer Brandon. The Rules require
that the lawyer take “reasonable efforts” to protect the other lawyer’s
client’s information. Rule 1.6, Comment 17. The duty imposed by Rule
4.4(b) upon Lawyer Brandon when he receives a misdirected fax is to notify
Lawyer Ben rather than to forward the documents to the client.

24. D All the answers are true. All in-person solicitations of a

prospective client are prohibited when your significant motive is your own
compensation. Defining prohibited solicitations also requires enumeration of
permitted solicitations, such as the examples offered in the three
statements.

25. A Rule 4.1(b) creates a duty to disclose information to third

parties in order to avoid assisting a client’s fraudulent act. A lawyer’s
obligations under Rule 4.1 are limited by her duty of confidentiality under
Rule 1.6, but those limits are not absolute. The Rules permit a lawyer to
disclose confidential information about past, present, or future client fraud or
client crime that has caused or is reasonably certain to cause financial harm
to another person. Rule 1.6(b)(2). The lawyer’s right to disclose this
category of confidential client communication is based on the client’s breach
of duty to the lawyer not to use her services in this manner. Under Rule
1.6(b)(3), a lawyer can reveal client confidences after the criminal or
fraudulent behavior but before its effects are complete. If a lawyer fails to
make the disclosure, she is participating in the fraud or crime by her client.
PR Practice Questions 2 – West Academic 2024
25 Questions
Answers and explanations at the end of the document

1. Client Chloe retained the services of Lawyer Tony about a securities

issue related to her ownership of stock in a publicly-traded company, but
their relationship quickly grew beyond the normal lawyer-client relationship.
Lawyer Tony and Client Chloe began a dating relationship that soon became
a sexual relationship.

Which of the following best describes Lawyer Tony’s ethical situation?

A. Lawyer Tony may continue to represent Client Chloe, if she provides

informed consent, confirmed in writing, to the continued representation.

B. Lawyer Tony may continue to represent Client Chloe is she consents

after consulting another lawyer.

C. Lawyer Tony must withdraw from representing Client Chloe.

D. Lawyer Tony may continue to represent Client Chloe, because her case
does not raise the potential for prejudice to her as a result of their
relationship.

2. Lawyer Phillips represents Client Justin, a former high school football

coach accused of causing the death of one of his players by denying him
water during the hot weather of summer practices. Fearing he would not be
able to afford the entire fee charged by Lawyer Phillips, Client Justin has
signed over to Lawyer Phillips the literary rights to his story. Client Justin
faces a civil wrongful death case for damages brought by the dead player’s
family. Lawyer Phillips is seeking a book contract for Client Justin.

Which of the following describes Lawyer Phillips’s situation?

A. Lawyer Phillips is subject to discipline, because she cannot acquire her

client’s literary or media rights for his case.

B. Lawyer Phillips is not subject to discipline, because the focus of the

book will be on Client Justin’s civil trial.

C. Lawyer Phillips is not subject to discipline, because Client Justin needs

the money to pay her fee.
D. Lawyer Phillips is subject to discipline, but someone else in her firm
may acquire the publication rights from Client Justin while the wrongful death
case is pending.

3. New Lawyer Lucy’s recent interview with a potential client left her
clueless about how ethically to represent his interests. As Lawyer Lucy sees
the situation, she would have to disclose her client’s confidential information
in order to obtain ethical advice about how to proceed.

What is Lawyer Lucy’s ethical disclosure obligation?

A. Lawyer Lucy may disclose her client’s confidential information to

obtain ethical advice under the Rules, but only if she first obtains her client’s
informed consent in writing.

B. Lawyer Lucy must not disclose her client’s confidential information to

obtain ethical advice.

C. Lawyer Lucy may disclose her client’s confidential information to

obtain ethical advice, but only if the disclosures are to a person who works
with a bar association’s ethics hotline.

D. Lawyer Lucy may disclose her client’s confidential information to

obtain ethical advice from another lawyer bound by confidentiality rules.

4. Lawyer Willa is a partner in a local law firm. For one of her clients,
Metro Stoneware Corporation, she is litigating a “right to strike” provision in
its collective bargaining agreement with its employees to nullify the broad
interpretation that their employees’ union prefers. One of Willa’s other
clients is a separate labor union with a collective bargaining agreement at
the local underwear company. Coincidentally, that union is advocating a
broad interpretation of its “right to strike” provision.

Is Willa subject to discipline for advocating both sides of the same issue?

A. Yes, because the Rules treat this type of “positional conflict” as per se
unethical.

B. No, if the conflict does not materially limit her representation of one of
her clients.

C. No, if the underwear union gives its informed consent to the conflicting
representation.
D. Yes, but only if the two representations involve litigation.

5. In the course of seeking professional advice from Lawyer Sarah, Client

Sam discloses that he committed the crime with which he is charged. Later
that same day he tells his bank teller, grocery clerk and furnace repairman of
his criminal acts.

If a trial judge later orders Lawyer Sarah to disclose what Client Sam had told
her that day, which of the following describes whether there has been a
waiver of the lawyer-client privilege or the ethical duty of confidentiality?

A. There has been a waiver of both the lawyer-client privilege and the
ethical duty of confidentiality; Lawyer Sarah must disclose what Client Sam
told her.

B. There has been a waiver of the lawyer-client privilege but not the
ethical duty of confidentiality; Lawyer Sarah must disclose what Client Sam
told her.

C. There has been no waiver of either the lawyer-client privilege or the

ethical duty of confidentiality; Lawyer Sarah must not disclose what Client
Sam told her.

D. There has been a waiver of the ethical duty of confidentiality but not
the lawyer-client privilege.

6. The law partnership of Ames and Bean employed Lawyer Lana as an

associate lawyer. Client Cross hired Lawyer Ames to sue one of his
competitors for tortious interference with contract. Lawyer Ames assigned
Lawyer Lana to do the necessary research. Lawyer Lana confined her
research to state law. Any reasonably competent general practitioner would
have discovered a more favorable body of parallel federal law. Ames
eventually brought the case to trial on state law theories only, and Client
Cross lost the case. If the case had been tried under the federal law, Client
Cross would have won a large judgment.

Which of the following is true?

A. Lawyer Lana is liable for malpractice.

B. If Lawyer Lana is liable for malpractice, then Ames also is liable.

C. If Lawyers Lana and Ames are liable for malpractice, then Bean also is
liable.

D. Answers A, B and C are true.

7. After a client recently brought a potentially lucrative breach of contract

case to the law firm, Lawyer Dewey filed a lawsuit against Adversary Abner.
After Adversary Abner answered the complaint, Lawyer Dewey instructed
Investigator Ike to invite Adversary Abner to go to lunch and find out as
much about Adversary Abner and the case as possible without appearing to
be too nosey.

Which of the following describes Lawyer Dewey’s ethical situation if

Investigator Ike sends a long memo about Adversary Abner to Lawyer Dewey
after the lunch?

A. Lawyer Dewey is not subject to discipline for sending Investigator Ike

to interview Adversary Abner.

B. Lawyer Dewey is subject to discipline for sending Investigator Ike to

talk to Adversary Abner.

C. Lawyer Dewey is subject to discipline only if Investigator Ike obtains

privileged information from Adversary Abner.

D. Lawyer Dewey is not subject to discipline for sending Investigator Ike

to talk to Adversary Abner unless Investigator Ike obtains privileged
information from Adversary Abner.

8. Lawyer Will tries to avoid litigation situations, even on behalf of his

past clients who are in need of his services. Last month, Client Kevin asked
Lawyer Will to represent him in a dispute with his cable television provider
about billing practices. Lawyer Will agreed to represent Client Kevin, with
one stipulation: he would counsel Client Kevin about the matter but if the
dispute had to be litigated, Client Kevin knew that he would have to find
another lawyer.

Is Lawyer Will subject to discipline for agreeing to represent Client Kevin

under that condition?

A. Yes, because the client alone determines the scope of the

representation.
B. Yes, because as long as the client is not asking his lawyer to assist in
criminal or fraudulent conduct, the client dictates the scope of the
representation.

C. No, because a lawyer may limit the scope of the representation if the
client gives informed consent.

D. No, because a lawyer may limit the scope of the representation

regardless of whether the client consents.

9. As part of her standard employment contract, Lawyer Luther includes a

section pertaining to each client’s consent to Lawyer Luther’s future conflicts
of interest.

Under which of the following circumstances would such a consent provision

be valid under the Rules?

A. Such a consent provision may be given orally or in writing in this

circumstance.

B. Such a consent provision does not have to be in writing.

C. Such a consent provision must be in writing, and must include a full

disclosure of the material risks and reasonably available alternatives of going
forward with or without Lawyer Luther as the client’s counsel.

D. Such a consent provision is never valid.

10. After successfully obtaining a hefty settlement for Sam Jones in a

personal injury case, Lawyer Arthur was troubled by the fact that, in
preparing for trial, Jones had told him that he is a cocaine trafficker and plans
to continue engaging in selling tainted cocaine which teenagers often
consume. Lawyer Arthur contacted the local police about Sam’s admissions
to him.

Did Lawyer Arthur violate the rules on confidentiality by reporting his client’s
admission?

A. Yes, because he must not reveal confidences to others, but may

disclose the client’s secrets.
B. Yes, because he must never reveal “information relating to
representation of a client” without the client’s consent.

C. No, because he always may disclose information relating to his client’s

intent to engage in any future criminal conduct.

D. No, if Lawyer Arthur reasonably believes that giving the information to

the police would prevent Jones from committing an act that Lawyer Arthur
believes is likely to result in reasonably certain death or substantial bodily
harm to the area’s teenagers.

11. A lawsuit was filed recently by First Bank against Paul Sims, in which
the law firm of Smith and Jones represents the plaintiff. The suit alleges that
prior to leaving the bank’s employ in 2013, Sims made fraudulent loans to
himself through several fictitious accounts. Lawyer Travis recently came to
work for Smith and Jones after working for three years at the law firm of
Wilson and Craig, which just completed the representation of Sims in
connection with a lawsuit over a 2014 business dispute between Sims and a
business partner. However, Lawyer Travis is unaware of any information
about that case. The law firm of Smith and Jones has asked you to review the
relationships between Paul Sims and the firm.

Can the firm of Smith and Jones be disqualified from representing First
National Bank by virtue of Lawyer Travis’s prior employment at Wilson and
Craig while that firm represented Sims in a lawsuit?

A. Yes, because the Sims matter and the First National Bank matter are
substantially related.

B. No, because Lawyer Travis acquired no confidential information about

Sims’s breach of contract case while at Wilson and Craig.

C. No, only because the Sims matter and the First National Bank matter
are substantially related.

D. Yes, because Lawyer Travis recalls that his Wilson and Craig colleagues
had represented Sims.

12. While driving home from a golf outing, a Highway Patrol officer gave
Lawyer Homer Simson a traffic ticket for having a defective tail light. A traffic
ticket is a criminal misdemeanor in Lawyer Simson’s state.

Can Lawyer Simson be disciplined for having received the traffic ticket?
A. No, because the offense does not reflect adversely on the lawyer’s
fitness.

B. No, because Lawyer Simson was not acting in a professional capacity.

C. Yes, because the ticket shows a lack of respect for law.

D. None of the above.

13. Lawyer Cowell has not practiced for years, but he still pays bar dues
annually. When his good friend O’Leary lost his house due to a fire, Lawyer
Cowell who is employed as an insurance adjuster inflated his estimate of
O’Leary’s actual losses hoping to receive a kickback from O’Leary. However,
O’Leary refused to give Lawyer Cowell any money.

Can Lawyer Cowell be disciplined for his conduct?

A. No, because Lawyer Cowell did not engage in such conduct in his
capacity as a lawyer.

B. No, because he received no kickback.

C. Yes, because he acted in a prohibited conflict of interest situation when

he adjusted his friend’s claim.

D. Yes, because he submitted a fraudulent insurance claim.

14. While seeking legal advice from his lawyer, Lawyer Dardeen, Gatter
told Lawyer Dardeen that she has had financial problems because her former
lawyer (Lark) has stolen money from her. Gatter begged Lawyer Dardeen not
to reveal this information because Lark is her sister-in-law. Lawyer Dardeen
told her that unless she was willing to let him reveal the information, there is
little that he could do. He assured her, though, that he would keep her
secret.

Can Lawyer Dardeen be disciplined for not revealing this information to the
disciplinary authorities?

A. Yes, because he must report such unfavorable information to the

appropriate tribunal empowered to investigate it.

B. No, because the information is confidential.

C. No, unless the amount stolen is large.

D. Yes, if Gatter’s concerns for Lark’s wife are groundless.

15. Lawyer Nussbaum counsels and advises clients about tax matters and
other transactions that are largely tax-motivated. If a client-taxpayer’s
treatment of a transaction is not challenged by the Internal Revenue Service,
the transaction may result in a substantial reduction in taxes to the client. If,
on the other hand, the transaction is not upheld, the taxpayer will be
required to pay the tax he had hoped to avoid plus interest.

In advising a client on such a transaction with doubtful consequences, in

which of the following fee arrangements would Lawyer Nussbaum be subject
to discipline for the fee arrangements, assuming that the fee is not
“unreasonable”?

A. Lawyer Nussbaum and Client Clinton agree that the client will be
charged a fixed fee which includes not only the planning of the transaction
but which would also cover representation of the client in the event the
client’s return is selected for audit, both before the Internal Revenue Service
and in possible litigation before the Tax Court. If either the audit or the Tax
Court litigation did not ensue, the lawyer would still keep the fee.

B. Lawyer Nussbaum and Client Clinton agree on a contingent fee where

Lawyer Nussbaum is only to be paid if he accomplishes a tax saving for the
client.

C. Lawyer Nussbaum and Client Clinton agree on a fixed fee coupled with
a contingency on the outcome of the case providing it is also understood that
the fixed fee applies irrespective of the outcome and that the contingency
applies only to the tax saving effected.

D. Answers A, B, and C are all ethical fee arrangements.

16. Lawyer Choate represents Client Gore in the purchase of a home. For a
fee of $3,000, the representation will last from August until December. In
October, Client Kemp comes to Lawyer Choate about filing a $200,000
personal injury case against Client Gore on a contingent fee basis. The
statute of limitations of the claim will run in November.

How should Lawyer Choate ethically handle the situation?

A. Lawyer Choate should have another lawyer in his office handle the
personal injury claim.

B. Lawyer Choate should transfer Kemp to another law firm but may claim
a referral fee of one-third of the net fee.

C. Lawyer Choate may accept Kemp’s case, if he makes a full disclosure

to Kemp and Kemp consents.

D. Lawyer Choate cannot represent Kemp absent informed consent from

both parties.

17. Attorney Bert practices largely in the areas of tax, wills and estates,
and trusts. Attorney Bert learned of a new Internal Revenue Service
regulation that may affect provisions in a will she prepared for former Client
Ernie two years ago. Attorney Bert has not heard from former Client Ernie
since she drew the will.

Is Attorney Bert subject to discipline if she advises former Client Ernie of the
new IRS ruling?

A. No, because Attorney Bert believes that the new rules may affect
former Client Ernie’s will.

B. No, unless Attorney Bert’s motive is to secure employment by former

Client Ernie.

C. Yes, because former Client Ernie is no longer a client.

D. Yes, because Attorney Bert would be soliciting legal business.

18. Attorney Fred was sued in 2014 by Slate. Slate claimed that Fred had
committed malpractice in his representation of Slate in an employment
contract dispute. Attorney Rubble represented Fred in the malpractice
action. In 2016 Fred has filed a complaint against Dino. The complaint claims
that Dino manufactured defective toasters.

Which of the following is the best answer if Attorney Rubble represents Dino
in Fred’s case against Dino?
A. Attorney Rubble will be disciplined if he represents Dino because
Rubble cannot be directly adverse to a former client.

B. Attorney Rubble is not subject to discipline because he has no prior

relationship with Dino.

C. Attorney Rubble would be subject to discipline if he used information

about Fred gleaned from his representation of Fred to Fred’s disadvantage.

D. Attorney Rubble would not be subject to discipline because the two

matters are not the same or substantially related.

19. Attorney Blinky has handled commercial litigation matters for World
Bank. Attorney Brian, Blinky’s associate, now has the opportunity to
represent Fruit Truck Inc. in an action against World Bank. Fruit Truck claims
that a World Bank armored car negligently caused a traffic collision which
resulted in personal injuries to a Fruit Truck employee and property damage
to Fruit Truck property.

Is Blinky subject to discipline for his conduct?

A. Attorney Blinky would be subject to discipline if he represented Fruit

Truck in this action, but Attorney Brian can do it ethically even without World
Bank’s consent.

B. Attorney Brian would be subject to discipline if he accepted the Fruit

Truck representation.

C. Attorney Blinky or Attorney Brian could represent Fruit Truck without

threat of discipline.

D. Attorney Brian would not be subject to discipline as long as Attorney

Blinky is screened.

20. Lawyer Lynn represents Client Calvin in a personal injury case, which
settled for $75,000. Lawyer Lynn deposited the settlement check in her law
firm’s trust account. Lawyer Lynn informed Client Calvin about receipt of the
check and stated that her fee in the case was $25,000. Client Calvin argues
that Lawyer Lynn is entitled to only $15,000.

Which of the following describes the best ethical resolution of the situation?
A. All of the money from the settlement must remain in the law firm’s
trust account until the fee dispute is resolved.

B. The parties to the lawsuit must submit their fee dispute to arbitration.

C. Lawyer Lynn must disburse $50,000 to Client Calvin and must retain
$25,000 in the law firm’s trust account until the dispute is resolved.

D. Lawyer Lynn is entitled to withdraw the amount of her fee which is not
in dispute ($15,000), and must disburse $50,000 to Client Calvin. The
remaining amount ($10,000) must remain in the law firm’s trust account
until the fee dispute is resolved.

21. Lawyer Luke represents Client Callie in a breach of contract case. Since
the beginning of the representation, Lawyer Luke has realized that Client
Callie is not dependable about keeping her word about anything. For
example, on the day the trial is supposed to begin, Client Callie has not
appeared and the trial judge is unhappy with yet another problem with
Lawyer Luke’s reliability, vicarious or otherwise. When the trial judge asks
Lawyer Luke where his client is, Lawyer Luke states to the court that he does
not know. In fact, Client Callie had called him at his office just before he left
to go to the courthouse, and she told him that she had decided to avoid the
stress of the trial by taking a vacation at a resort in the Caribbean.

Which of the following best describes whether Lawyer Luke is subject to

discipline?

A. Lawyer Luke is subject to discipline, because he lied to the trial judge

by telling the judge that he did not know where Client Callie was located.

B. Lawyer Luke is not subject to discipline, because Client Callie’s location

is not a material fact.

C. Lawyer Luke is not subject to discipline, because he did not intend to

deceive the trial judge.

D. Lawyer Luke is not subject to discipline, because he acted zealously in

his client’s best interest.

22. Client Cal believes that he has a very good claim against Jill for
reneging on a contract they signed for the sale of Client Cal’s home. Client
Cal had been in Lawyer Lennox’s office for about ten minutes describing the
circumstances of his claim when Lawyer Lennox received an urgent call from
the latter’s father that her mother had become acutely ill and was on the
way to the hospital. Apologizing to Client Cal, Lawyer Lennox rushed out of
the office. After two weeks without hearing from Lawyer Lennox, Client Cal
became impatient and decided to see another lawyer.

Which of the following describes the ethical situation between Lawyer

Lennox and Client Cal?

A. Lawyer Lennox is not subject to discipline because she never discussed

a fee arrangement with Client Cal.

B. Lawyer Lennox is not subject to discipline if she reveals Client Cal’s

information to anyone.

C. Lawyer Lennox is subject to discipline if she reveals Client Cal’s

confidential information.

D. Lawyer Lennox is not subject to discipline because Client Cal had no

reasonable expectation of becoming her client.

23. Lawyer Kim has been an associate lawyer for the past three years. For
most of that time, she has been assigned to Partner Palmer and Partner
Player on their medical malpractice cases. In a recent case, Lawyer Kim
became concerned that the assumption of risk defense being asserted by the
partners is completely without merit. When she asked the two partners
about the substance of the assumption of risk defense in that case, Partner
Palmer told her that something factually would turn up, and Partner Player
told her to just keep doing as she was told. Realizing that she cannot take a
frivolous position that lacks a factual basis, Lawyer Kim does not want to
have discipline charges brought against her by the state bar association. Yet,
she doesn’t want to be fired if she decides not to follow the course dictated
by Partner Player.

Of the following, which describe Lawyer Kim’s ethical course of action?

A. If confronted by the trial judge or by bar association charges that she

has no factual support for her client’s defense of assumption of risk, Lawyer
Kim can state that she is following the orders from Partners Palmer and
Player.

B. If she is fired for not following the orders from Partners Palmer and
Player, Lawyer Kim can sue them for wrongful discharge.
C. Lawyer Kim is ethically responsible for her actions, despite being
ordered by Partners Palmer and Player to pursue the frivolous defense of
assumption of risk.

D. Answers B and C are correct.

24. In the following statements, which involve(s) potential successful

invocation of the evidentiary lawyer-client privilege?

A. In response to a request from her lawyer, the client sends the lawyer
several strands of hair from her head.

B. A client makes statements to her lawyer in her lawyer’s reception area

where there are other clients waiting to see that lawyer.

C. A prospective client communicates to a lawyer, but the lawyer declines

to represent that person.

D. Answers A and C are both correct.

25. Lawyer Longfellow represents Client Allen who is defending a breach of

contract action regarding a contract with his former business partner, Clyde.
Lawyer Longfellow also represents Client Bruce who is seeking a divorce
from his wife, Della. Throughout pretrial discovery in Clyde v. Allen, Clyde’s
lawyer never identified his trial witnesses until two weeks before trial when it
became apparent that one of Clyde’s important witnesses at trial will be
Client Bruce.

Faced with this uncomfortable situation, in which of the following is Lawyer

Longfellow not subject to discipline?

A. Obtains written consent from Client Allen only, before cross-examining

Client Bruce.

B. Obtains written consent from Client Bruce only, before cross-examining

Client Bruce.

C. Obtains oral consent from both Client Allen and Client Bruce.

D. Withdraws from representing both Client Allen and Client Bruce.

--------

Answers

1. C A lawyer cannot have a sexual relationship with a client, unless

that consensual relationship already existed prior to the beginning of the
lawyer-client relationship. Rule 1.8(j). Sexual relations with a client create
an ethical problem for a lawyer because of his potential undue influence and
the client’s emotional vulnerability, both of which affect the lawyer’s
independent personal judgment and rebut the client’s meaningful consent.

2. A A lawyer cannot acquire the literary rights to his client’s case

while she is still working for him on that case. Rule 1.8(d). Lawyer Phillips
should not be tempted to practice her case in a manner that increases the
publicity value of the media rights. For example, she should not reject a plea
offer ending her client’s case to his benefit because going to trial instead
would increase the market value of a book or movie about his case. After the
representation concludes, Client Phillips would have no advantage over a
literary agent in obtaining the rights to her (possibly now former) client’s
story. If he still owes her fee, at that time Client Justin and Lawyer Phillips
could agree on forgiving that debt in exchange for publication rights.

3. D In order to obtain advice about her compliance with the Rules, a

lawyer may reveal information relating to the representation of her
client. Rule 1.6(b)(4). Bar associations offer services to lawyers for the
purpose of obtaining advice from other members of the bar about their
ethical conduct. ABA Formal Opinion 98–411 cautions lawyers to (1) consult
in hypothetical terms, (2) to obtain permission from your client if the
consultation might put her at risk, (3) not to consult a lawyer who might
represent the adverse party, and (4) to obtain assurances of confidentiality
for the information.

4. B A positional conflict exists when a lawyer represents a client in

one matter seeking a particular result, and at the same time she represents
another client in a different case in which she is taking a contrary legal
position. Lawyer Willa may advocate antagonistic legal positions in different
cases, as long as the positional conflict does not materially limit her
representation of one of her clients. Rule 1.7(b). Relevant factors include
“where the cases are pending, whether the issue is substantive or
procedural, the temporal relationship between the matters, the significance
of the issue to the immediate and long term interests of the clients involved,
and the clients’ reasonable expectations in retaining the lawyer.” Rule 1.7,
Comment 24.
5. B Waiving the evidentiary privilege does not waive the ethical duty
of confidentiality. As for the lawyer-client privilege, Lawyer Sarah cannot
claim the privilege and refuse to reveal Client Sam’s admission. The privilege
belongs to Client Sam, who has lost it by revealing the information about the
representation to others. If Lawyer Sarah attempts to resist disclosure by
asserting the privilege, the court can order her to disclose matters not falling
within the evidentiary privilege. Even if Client Sam loses the evidentiary
privilege, Lawyer Sarah still has an ethical obligation to maintain Client
Sam’s confidential information. If Lawyer Sarah is called to testify about
Client Sam’s admission, she must assert her ethical duty of confidentiality
but the court may order her to disclose the information.

6. D A lawyer who is not diligent in her representation may be liable

for monetary damages to a former client for malpractice committed by her or
by her employee. Negligence is the most common civil claim brought by
former clients against their lawyers. Because former clients frequently bring
legal malpractice claims, many lawyers carry legal malpractice insurance.

7. B Rule 4.2 prohibits lawyers from directly contacting a person the

lawyer knows is represented by an attorney. Lawyer Dewey has violated Rule
4.2 because she knew that Lawyer Cheatham represented Adversary Abner
before sending Investigator Ike to meet with Adversary Abner. Lawyer Dewey
is also responsible under Rule 5.3 if Investigator Ike tries to do what Lawyer
Dewey, i.e., contact a represented person with Lawyer Dewey’s knowledge
or consent.

8. C A lawyer may limit the scope of her representation if the

limitation is reasonable and the client gives the lawyer his informed
consent. Rule 1.2(c). Before he can give informed consent, the lawyer must
explain the risks of limited representation and any available alternatives to
such limitations. Rule 1.0(e).

9. C Clients have the authority to waive their lawyer’s conflict of

interest in advance. Rule 1.7, Comment 22. A prospective waiver means the
same as the phrase “informed consent” in the Model Rules. Such a waiver is
more likely to be effective if it relates to a future conflict that is unrelated to
the subject matter of the current representation. An effective disclosure
depends on the lawyer’s ability to explain all important risks connected to
the future conflict. For a consent to be “informed,” a lawyer must explain to
her client the “material risks” and “reasonably available alternatives” of
going forward with or without her as counsel. Rule 1.0(e).

10. D Lawyer Arthur has discretion under Rule 1.6(b)(1) to disclose

the communication if he reasonably believes it would prevent reasonably
certain death or substantial bodily harm.
11. B Lawyer Travis acquired no confidential information whatsoever
about Sims’s breach of contract case while at Wilson and Craig, much less
any information which would be material to the First National Bank case.
Because there does not appear to be any violation of Rule 1.9, Smith and
Jones may continue to represent First National Bank in its lawsuit against
Sims.

12. A Under Rule 8.4(b), discipline may be imposed for crimes that
reflect “adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a
lawyer.” Having a defective tail light does not reflect adversely on the
lawyer’s fitness to practice law.

13. D Rule 8.4(c) prohibits lawyers from engaging in “dishonesty,

fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.” By contrast, issues of “personal
morality, such as adultery” lack a specific connection to a person’s fitness to
practice law.

14. B Under Rule 8.3, the duty to report is extinguished or superseded

by the duty of confidentiality under Rule 1.6 when the client wishes the
information to remain secret.

15. D Pursuant to Rule 1.5(d), all three of the preceding fee

arrangements are ethical alternatives. Because the facts indicate that none
of the fee arrangements discussed involves a criminal case, Rule 1.5(d)(2)
does not render any of them unreasonable per se. That Rule prohibits any
arrangement for charging or collecting a contingent fee for representing a
defendant in a criminal case.

16. D One example of a concurrent client conflict exists under Rule

1.7(a)(1), which prohibits a lawyer from representing a client if that
representation “will be directly adverse to another client.” The nature of the
conflict is between two current clients. Suing a current client like Gore, even
on an unrelated matter, is a directly adverse conflict.

17. A Rule 7.3 states that in-person solicitations of a prospective

client are prohibited when the lawyer’s significant motive is her own
compensation. Defining prohibited solicitations requires enumeration of
permitted solicitations. One of those permitted solicitations is with former
clients.

18. C Rule 1.9(c) states a lawyer like Rubble cannot disclose

information relating to a former client’s representation (regardless of
whether he learned it from Fred or others) unless the Rules permit or require
disclosure or unless that information has become generally known. The facts
here describe a situation of successive, not simultaneous, representation,
where Attorney Rubble in 2016 seeks to represent a client in a lawsuit
against Fred, whom he represented in 2014. In cases of successive
representation, Rule 1.9 imposes duties on lawyers to their former clients.

19. B Under Rules 1.7(a) and 1.10, Attorney Brian would be subject
to discipline for representing Fruit Truck because screening of a disqualified
lawyer like Attorney Blinky is not permitted in order that Attorney Brian can
represent Fruit Truck. Attorney Brian would be subject to discipline if he
represented Fruit Truck.

20. D There are various reasons for a lawyer to possess her client’s
property, e.g., a settlement check which she owes to her client. The Rules
seek to protect the property of others in a lawyer’s possession and to
maintain both the fact and appearance of her honesty. Lawyers must keep
separate identifiable trust fund accounts of clients’ funds and they must not
be commingled with her money. Rule 1.15(a). The lawyer’s duty includes
safeguarding legal fees and expenses which have been paid in advance until
they have been earned or incurred. Rule 1.15(c). The proper procedure is
to withdraw funds from the client’s account when a lawyer is entitled to do
so, place it in her account, and then write a check on her account for that
amount. After a lawyer receives funds belonging in a trust fund account, she
must promptly notify the client or non-client third party. She also must
promptly pay or deliver to the client any trust funds or property to which she
is entitled. Even if it is in the best interest of the client, a lawyer cannot
withhold notice or payment, unless she has a prior agreement with her
client. If a lawyer and her client have a dispute about trust fund property,
she cannot withdraw the disputed portion of the fee until the dispute is
resolved. Rule 1.15(e). The lawyer must distribute the undisputed portion
promptly. She must not coerce her client to give up her claim by refusing to
deliver money that belongs to the client.

21. A A lawyer cannot knowingly make false statements of fact to a

tribunal. Rule 3.3(a)(1). While she does not testify to a tribunal under oath,
any factual assertions to the tribunal (“my client is ill”) must be based on her
knowledge that she knows is true or believes to be true on the basis of a
reasonably diligent inquiry.

22. C Rule 1.18 explicitly recognizes a duty to a prospective client,

even though a lawyer may not talk to him for very long or in much depth
about his case and even if she ends up not representing him. A “prospective
client” is a “person who discusses with a lawyer the possibility of forming a
client-lawyer relationship with respect to a matter.” Rule 1.18(a).Comment
2 limits this broad definition. Unilaterally giving information to the lawyer
does not guarantee that there is a client-lawyer relationship. Instead, it is the
lawyer’s willingness to discuss the possibility of forming a client-lawyer
relationship that determines whether the client has a “reasonable
expectation” of becoming a client. Lawyer Lennox has a duty of
confidentiality to Client Cal as a prospective client while deciding whether to
represent him, no matter how brief was their initial conference. Rule
1.18(b).

23. D Lawyers have brought wrongful discharge claims against their

law firms or their clients when they have been fired for their refusal to
engage in unethical activity. The typical case relates to being fired for not
following the supervising lawyer’s unethical directive. Rule 5.2(a). In
addition, Lawyer Kim is ethically responsible for her own actions, regardless
of the directives issued by the lawyers she works for. A is wrong because a
lawyer cannot escape her responsibility for ethical misconduct by claiming
that she was just following orders. Rule 5.2(a). However, if the existence of
an ethical violation is not clear, she can defer to the judgment of her
supervising lawyer when she followed the “reasonable resolution of an
arguable question of professional duty.” Rule 5.2(b).

24. C If a prospective client consults a lawyer, their preliminary

communications are privileged even if the lawyer is not ultimately retained.
When a lawyer is appointed to represent an indigent defendant, the
communications between them are privileged even though the defendant
pays no fee. A client enjoys the same evidentiary privilege even if she has
not paid her lawyer’s fees. Excluded from the privilege are physical
characteristics of the client, such as her hair. If the client makes statements
to unknown persons in her lawyer’s reception area, the privilege does not
apply even if the persons work for the lawyer. The privilege does not apply if
a client makes statements to her lawyer in the presence of others who hear
the statements.

25. D In order for Lawyer Longfellow to represent Client Allen at trial

and cross-examine an adverse material witness like Client Bruce who is also
her client, there must be written consent from both clients even if Client
Bruce’s case is unrelated. The cross-examination ordinarily would constitute
a conflict under Rule 1.7(a)(1). Vigorous cross-examination violates the
duty of loyalty to Client Bruce, the witness, and failure to cross-examine
forcefully violates the duty to represent Client Allen zealously. ABA Formal
Opinion 92–367. D is correct because the conflict arose only after the
representation of Client Allen began; Lawyer Longfellow would have to
withdraw from representing both of her clients.