Ethical Dilemmas Facing Attorneys: Disciplinary Actions and Confidentiality, Exams of Law

Download Ethical Dilemmas Facing Attorneys: Disciplinary Actions and Confidentiality and more Exams Law in PDF only on Docsity! file:///J|/Backups/WEB%20ARCHIVE/OLDSITE/Full%20Jan%2030%202008/exams/Content/qfprf94.htm[1/23/2009 8:47:16 AM] PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY QUIZ FALL 1994 LAST 4 DIGITS OF SS # This is a closed book/closed rules quiz for which you have fifty minutes. Each question counts one point. 1) Must or subject to discipline asks whether the conduct referred to or described in the question subjects the attorney to discipline under the ABA Model Rules of Professional Responsibility. 2) Should asks whether the conduct in question at least conforms to the level of conduct expected of an ethical attorney, as reflected in the Ethical Considerations of the Code of Professional Responsibility and the rules and comments of the Model Rules. 3) May or it is proper asks whether the conduct in question is professionally appropriate in that it would not subject the attorney to discipline and is not inconsistent with the Ethical Considerations of the Code of Professional Responsibility and the rules and comments of the Model Rules. , It is intended that there be only one correct answer for each question. If you feel that there are two correct answers, please pick an answer and state your reasoning briefly in the margin . 1. Attorney represented Gail against Defendant in a products liability suit. Defendant's attorney offered $500,000 in settlement of Gail's claim on the condition that Attorney not file:///J|/Backups/WEB%20ARCHIVE/OLDSITE/Full%20Jan%2030%202008/exams/Content/qfprf94.htm[1/23/2009 8:47:16 AM] bring any similar suits against Defendant. a) Attorney must agree to the condition if it is in the best interest of Gail to accept the settlement offer. b) Attorney may accept the condition and the settlement offer with Gail's consent. c) Attorney is subject to discipline if he agrees to the condition. d) Attorney may agree to the condition if there are other attorneys available to bring products liability actions against Defendant. 2) Attorney left the prosecutor's office after ten years to open a criminal law practice specializing in DUI defense. For which of the following is the attorney subject to discipline: i) advertising that she is "a former prosecutor specializing in criminal law," with the required disclaimer that ~State X does not certify legal specialties." ii) advertising that she had "a 90% conviction rate". While a prosecutor 85% of the cases she handled were resolved by guilty plea; of the remaining 15%, one third (5% of the total) resulted in convictions, and two thirds (10% of the total) resulted in acquittals. iii) telling prospective clients that she is a close friend and confidante of Judge Barnes, the judge who handles DUI cases (this is true) a) all of the above b) (i) and (ii) but not (iii) c) (i) and (iii) but not (ii) file:///J|/Backups/WEB%20ARCHIVE/OLDSITE/Full%20Jan%2030%202008/exams/Content/qfprf94.htm[1/23/2009 8:47:16 AM] personally benefit from the bequest e) Attorney is not subject to discipline if the codicil was witnessed by neutral witnesses 7) Attorney is asked by Sue to try to set aside a pre-nuptial agreement. Attorney's investigation discloses a reasonable basis for concluding that Harry, Sue's husband, concealed assets at the time of the pre-nuptial agreement. Attorney calls Harry and asks whether he is represented by counsel. When Harry replies that he is not, Attorney says that he represents Sue and that suit will be filed to set aside the pre-nuptial agreement unless a more equitable arrangement can be worked out. Is Attorney subject to discipline? a) Yes, for talking to an adverse party who is not represented by counsel b) Yes, for threatening civil litigation in order to achieve his client's goal c) No, because Harry has engaged in fraudulent conduct d) No, so long as Sue has authorized suit to be filed 8) M & N is a large law firm which represents the Updown Company in many matters, including an anti-trust suit brought by Bisco. M & N has just hired Carl, formerly with the firm of P & Q, which is counsel to Bisco in the antitrust action. Bisco has moved to disqualify M & N. While with P & Q, Carl worked for Bisco on tax matters and knows nothing about the antitrust suit and knows nothing that might be of value to Updown in the suit against Bisco. Should the motion to disqualify be granted? a) No, because Carl is under no duty to maintain the file:///J|/Backups/WEB%20ARCHIVE/OLDSITE/Full%20Jan%2030%202008/exams/Content/qfprf94.htm[1/23/2009 8:47:16 AM] confidences of Bisco after leaving P & Q. b) No, because the litigation between Updown and Bisco is not substantially related to the work done by Carl for Bisco. c) Yes, because of Carl's duty of loyalty to Bisco. d) Yes, unless Carl is screened from the Updown/Bisco litigation 9) M & N has also hired Dotty, who resigned her judgeship to become a partner at M & N. While a judge, Dotty presided over the Updown/Bisco litigation. Bisco has moved to disqualify M & N. Should the motion be granted? a) No, because Dotty did not represent Bisco b) No, unless Dotty negotiated for employment with M & N while presiding over the case c) Yes, unless Dotty is screened from the litigation, apportioned no part of the fee from it, with written notice given to the court to ascertain compliance d) Yes, because Dotty participated personally and substantially in the litigation. 10) Edgar asks Attorney to incorporate his small business. Edgar asks Attorney to take 10% of the stock as her fee. May Attorney agree? a) No, because she would thereby acquire a proprietary interest in the business b) No, because it is not known whether the business will succeed or fail c) Yes, if the arrangement is fair and reasonable, the arrangement is in writing, and Edgar is given a reasonable file:///J|/Backups/WEB%20ARCHIVE/OLDSITE/Full%20Jan%2030%202008/exams/Content/qfprf94.htm[1/23/2009 8:47:16 AM] opportunity to seek the advice of independent counsel d) Yes, because Edgar suggested the arrangement 11) Attorney represented Paul in a personal injury action without a fee arrangement. The case was settled for $100,000. Attorney then told Paul the fee would be 1~3 ($33,000). When Paul protested Attorney told him she was escrowing the entire $100,000. Rather than escrow the money, however, Attorney placed the entire check in her personal account. Attorney and Paul agreed on a fee of $25,000 and Attorney paid Paul $75,000. Which of the following statements is true: i) Attorney is subject to discipline for not entering into a written fee arrangement with Paul ii) Attorney is subject to discipline for not paying Paul at least $67,O00 on receipt of the settlement iii) Attorney is subject to discipline for placing the money in her personal account even though Paul suffered no financial loss. * * * * a) all of the statements are true b) only (i) and (ii) are true c) only (ii) and (iii) are true d) only (i) and (iii) are true 12) Attorney was hired by two brothers, Cain and Able, who are charged with possession of cocaine. Cain was driving Able's car when he was stopped for a traffic offense. A large bag of cocaine was found under the passenger seat. Attorney meets with the file:///J|/Backups/WEB%20ARCHIVE/OLDSITE/Full%20Jan%2030%202008/exams/Content/qfprf94.htm[1/23/2009 8:47:16 AM] is not in writing. * * * * Which of the above are true? a) all of the above b) (i) and (ii) but not (iii) c) (ii) and (iii) but not (i) d) (i) and (iii) but not (ii) 17. Brian and his fifteen year old son, Charlie, were involved in an accident when their car ran off the road into a tree. Charlie was seriously hurt. Brian told the police he was the driver and Charlie was the passenger. Brian's auto liability policy is with Safeguard. Debbie, Charlie's mother and Brian's ex-wife, sued Brian for Charlie's injuries and Safeguard retained Attorney to defend Brian. Brian admitted to Attorney that Charlie was the driver of the car and asked Attorney to-"go along with the scam." a) Attorney must notify Safeguard of the intended insurance fraud. b) Attorney may, but is not required to notify, Safeguard of the intended insurance fraud. c) Attorney must not notify Safeguard of the intended fraud without Brian's consent. d) Attorney must continue to represent Brian if Brian would be harmed by Attorney's withdrawal from representation. 18. Assume on the facts of (17) that Attorney withdraws from the representation and that a grand jury subpoenas him to testify to what Brian told him. Safeguard instructs Attorney to testify and file:///J|/Backups/WEB%20ARCHIVE/OLDSITE/Full%20Jan%2030%202008/exams/Content/qfprf94.htm[1/23/2009 8:47:16 AM] Brian instructs him not to testify. A claim of the attorney client privilege should be: a) Sustained b) Sustained because Brian did not attempt to commit a crime involving death or bodily harm c) Overruled because Safeguard is the holder of the privilege d) Overruled because Brian attempted to use Attorney to perpetrate a fraud 19. Toxichem hired Attorney in connection with a claim by the EPA that Toxichem was illegally dumping toxic wastes. Attorney interviewed Driver, a Toxichem employee, who admitted dumping the waste in the marsh. Attorney taped the interview and turned it over to Baker, the general manager of Toxichem. Attorney told Driver not to discuss the matter with anyone without first contacting him. Attorney's advice to Driver: a) subjects Attorney to discipline because it interferes with EPA's investigation of the case; b) subjects Attorney to discipline because Driver has admitted to criminal conduct; c) is proper if Attorney reasonably believes that Driver will not be adversely affected by refusing to cooperate with EPA; d) is proper because Driver is required to obey the instructions of Toxichem's attorney. 20. On the facts of (19) assume that Baker, general manager of Toxichem, decides to admit to EPA that Toxichem engaged in illegal dumping, but that Baker will claim that Driver's actions file:///J|/Backups/WEB%20ARCHIVE/OLDSITE/Full%20Jan%2030%202008/exams/Content/qfprf94.htm[1/23/2009 8:47:16 AM] were unauthorized and without the knowledge of other Toxichem employees. Driver objects, on the basis of the attorney client privilege, to Baker giving his taped statement to EPA. Driver's claim of privilege should be: a) overruled because the attorney client privilege is limited to statements made by those in the control group; b) overruled if Attorney explained to Driver at the time of the interview that Attorney represented Toxichem and Toxichem management would decide whether to release his statement to EPA; c) overruled if Driver has told anyone other than Attorney about the dumping; d) sustained. 21. Which of the following is not listed by the Model Rules as a proper factor in setting the fee? a) The fee customarily charged in the community; b) The time spent on the representation; c) The ability of the client to pay; d) The results obtained. 22. Attorney is an active member of Save Kentucky, an environmental group fighting to preserve rural parts of the state from development. Developer wishes to hire Attorney to seek industrial zoning for a large farm on the outskirts of town. Attorney wishes to undertake the representation and reasonably believes that her representation will not be adversely affected by her membership in Save Kentucky. She believes, however, that Save Kentucky will fight the development and she will lose the