Final Exam Review Flashcards
(20 cards)
The beneficiary of an estate, who was indigent,
met with an attorney about the possibility of
representing him in a dispute over his share of
the estate. The attorney’s secretary attended the
meeting to take notes. After discussing the
matter with the beneficiary, the attorney stated
that she could not take the case because her
reasonable fee would exceed the amount of the
potential recovery. Later, the attorney learned
from another attorney that the second attorney
had agreed to represent the beneficiary. The
attorney discussed the beneficiary’s position with
the second attorney, advising the lawyer of what
she believed were some weaknesses in the case.
Did the attorney who elected not to represent the
beneficiary behave properly?
(A) No, because she had an obligation to
represent the indigent beneficiary on a pro
bono basis.
(B) No, because she breached a duty of
confidentiality she owed to the beneficiary.
(C) Yes, because any duty of confidentiality was
destroyed by the presence of her secretary.
(D) Yes, because she could refuse to represent
the beneficiary on the basis of lack of
financial benefit to the attorney.
B
An attorney represented the plaintiff in an
automobile accident case. Two weeks before the
date set for trial, the attorney discovered that
there was an eyewitness to the accident. The
attorney interviewed the witness. Her version of
the accident was contrary to that of the plaintiff
and, if believed by the trier of fact, would
establish that the plaintiff was at fault. The
witness told the attorney that she had not been
interviewed by defense counsel. The witness
also told the attorney that she was uncomfortable
with testifying and that she had been thinking
about taking a vacation to Europe the following
week. The attorney told the witness that, since
no one had subpoenaed her yet, she had no
obligation to appear. He told her that trials were
very difficult for witnesses and suggested that
she take the vacation so that she would be
unavailable to testify.
Is the attorney subject to discipline?
(A) Yes, because the attorney asked the witness
to leave the jurisdiction.
(B) Yes, because the attorney did not subpoena
the witness knowing she was an eyewitness.
(C) No, because the witness had not been
subpoenaed by the defense.
(D) No, because the attorney did not offer the
witness any inducement not to appear at the
trial.
A
The chair of one of a state’s political parties
approached a law firm’s senior partner, who was
very active within that party, about representing
the political party in litigation opposing a ballot
measure backed by the state’s opposing party. A
junior partner at the firm was an active member
of the opposing party and had contributed
substantial time and money toward getting the
measure on the ballot. The firm had never
previously represented any political party or
organization. After discussing the matter with the
firm’s management, who were all aware of the
junior partner’s involvement with getting the
measure on the ballot, the senior partner decided
to represent the political party.
Is the senior partner’s representation of the
state’s political party proper?
(A) No, because one of the firm’s partners has a
conflict of interest.
(B) No, because the junior partner’s conflict of
interest would be imputed to the other
partners.
(C) Yes, because the junior partner’s conflict of
interest would not be imputed to the other
partners.
(D) Yes, because there is no conflict of interest.
C- while there is a PERSONAL conflict of interest, it would not be imputed to the partners.
A woman has asked an attorney to represent her
in obtaining compensation for a tract of land that
is being condemned by the state department of
transportation to build a new highway. Two
years ago, the attorney had been employed by
the department and had been assigned to search
title on several tracts of land, including the one
owned by the woman. The attorney remembers
a department engineer had drafted a confidential
memorandum advising against running a new
highway across the woman’s land because of a
potential adverse environmental impact. Because
of this information, the attorney believes it is
possible to prevent the condemnation of the
woman’s land or to increase the settlement
amount.
What is the proper action for the attorney to
take?
(A) Represent the woman on the issue of
damages only and not disclose the
information that might prevent the
condemnation.
(B) Represent the woman and attempt to
prevent the condemnation by using the
information about the adverse
environmental impact.
(C) Refuse to represent the woman but disclose
to her the information about the adverse
environmental impact.
(D) Refuse to represent the woman and not
disclose the information about the adverse
environmental impact.
D
An attorney who maintained a solo law practice
entered into substantive discussions with a law
firm about joining the firm. As part of these
discussions, the attorney revealed the identities
of her clients, their status as current or former
clients, and the matters for which she
represented them. The purpose of these
revelations, which did not compromise the
attorney-client privilege or otherwise prejudice
the clients, was to detect conflicts of interest that
would arise from the attorney joining the firm.
The attorney did not seek the informed consent
of her clients before making these revelations.
Due to an inability to resolve a potential conflict
of interest, the attorney did not join the law firm.
Were the attorney’s revelations proper?
(A) No, because the attorney did not seek the
informed consent of her clients before
making these revelations.
(B) No, because the attorney did not join the
law firm.
(C) Yes, because the purpose of the revelations
was to detect conflicts of interest that would
arise from the attorney joining the law firm.
(D) Yes, because the duty of confidentiality does
not apply to disclosures to another attorney
of information relating to the representation
of a client.
C
An attorney was sued by a client for malpractice.
The client alleged that the attorney failed to
reveal a conflict of interest that arose from the
attorney’s prior representation of another client.
The former client refused to consent to the
attorney’s disclosure of information about that
representation. Nevertheless, at a deposition,
the attorney testified about the nature of that
representation, revealing information to the
extent that it was relevant to the conflict-of-
interest issue. The attorney reasonably believed
that the disclosure was necessary to his defense
of the malpractice charge.
Does such testimony subject the attorney to
discipline for breach of the duty of confidentiality?
(A) No, because the attorney reasonably
believed that disclosure of the information
was necessary to his defense.
(B) No, because the information revealed did
not relate to a current client.
(C) Yes, because the litigation was not between
the attorney and the client whose
confidential information the attorney’s
testimony revealed.
(D) Yes, because the former client refused to
consent to disclosure.
A
A husband and wife were attorneys who practiced
at different law firms. The husband dealt
exclusively with estates and trust matters, while
his wife was a criminal defense attorney. A
decedent’s daughter employed the husband to
represent her in a dispute with her brother over
property owned by her deceased father. The
decedent’s son contacted the wife about legal
representation in this dispute. The wife directed
the son to a partner in her firm whose practice
was limited to estate and trust matters. The
partner agreed to represent the son. Apart from
the spousal relationship between the daughter’s
attorney and the attorney in the partner’s firm
who referred the decedent’s son to the partner,
the partner correctly concluded that the
arrangement did not create a significant risk of
materially limiting the partner’s representation of
the decedent’s son. Accordingly, the partner did
not discuss the possibility of a conflict of interest
with his client, the decedent’s son.
Is the partner subject to disqualification with
regard to his representation of the decedent’s son
in this dispute?
(A) Yes, because the partner came to represent
the decedent’s son through a referral from
another attorney, the wife, who was
personally disqualified from representing
the son.
(B) Yes, because the partner failed to secure the
informed consent of his client with regard to
representation of the opposing party by the
spouse of a member of his law firm.
(C) No, because the wife’s personal
disqualification is not imputed to the partner
as a member of her firm.
(D) No, because only the husband was
personally disqualified from representing
the decedent’s daughter in this matter.
C
An attorney represented both the owner of an art
gallery and a publisher. The gallery owner and
the publisher each made a practice of paying the
attorney’s fees in cash. The attorney received
separate cash payments from the gallery owner
and the publisher on the same day. Each
payment consisted of ten $100 bills, which the
attorney immediately deposited in her bank
account. One week later, the attorney was
contacted by United States Treasury agents, who
informed her that four of the bills had been
identified as counterfeit. The agents did not
accuse the attorney of knowingly passing the
counterfeit money but asked her who had given
her the bills. The attorney was subpoenaed to
testify before a grand jury and was asked who
could have given her the counterfeit money.
Is it proper for the attorney to provide the grand
jury with the names of the gallery owner and the
publisher?
(A) Yes, because negotiation of a counterfeit bill
is a criminal act.
(B) Yes, because under the circumstances
neither client’s identity is privileged.
(C) No, because counterfeiting is not a crime
that involves an imminent threat of death or
serious bodily harm.
(D) No, because the attorney has no way of
knowing which of the two clients gave her
the counterfeit bills.
B
A client, during a conference with her attorney in
his office about the client’s pending divorce,
threatened to kill her husband, from whom she
was separated. Based on his knowledge of the
client, the attorney believed his client’s threat to
be credible. The attorney took no action to warn
the client’s husband. Shortly thereafter, the
client shot her husband, seriously wounding him.
Is the attorney subject to discipline for his failure
to warn his client’s husband?
(A) Yes, because the attorney had a duty to
warn his client’s husband.
(B) Yes, because the attorney’s failure to warn
the client’s husband was the cause of the
husband’s harm.
(C) No, because, since the client’s husband did
not die, the client did not accomplish her
threat.
(D) No, because the attorney owed his client a
duty of confidentiality.
D
An attorney received a phone call from a client
asking the attorney to represent the client’s
daughter, a 19-year-old college student, against
a drug charge. The father told the attorney that
he would pay the attorney’s standard hourly rate
for the representation, as well as any expenses.
The following day, the attorney met with the
father and daughter, and the three discussed the
matter. When the daughter asked who was
paying for the services, the attorney responded
that they should simply focus on the case and
worry about that later. As the trial date
approached, the prosecution offered a plea deal.
The attorney brought the deal to the daughter,
who accepted it. When the father later learned
of this, he was furious with the attorney for failing
to include him in the discussion regarding the
plea deal. Were the attorney’s actions in
representing the daughter proper?
(A) No, because the daughter did not give
informed consent for the attorney to be paid
by her father.
(B) No, because the father should have been
notified of the plea deal.
(C) Yes, because a parent may pay the legal
fees for his child.
(D) Yes, because the attorney was not required
to inform the father of the plea deal.
A
An attorney represented a group of consumers
that brought an action for an emergency hearing
to halt the unfair public disclosure of the
consumers’ sensitive personal information on the
internet by a company that buys and sells
consumer debt. The temporary restraining order
sought by the attorney would enjoin the company
from disclosing any sensitive information without
first implementing reasonable safeguards to
maintain and protect the privacy, security, and
confidentiality of the information. Despite his due
diligence, the attorney was unable to give notice
of the emergency hearing to the company. No
one representing the company appeared at the
hearing, and the attorney asked for a temporary
restraining order from the judge. The attorney
argued in good faith that exposure of the
consumers’ sensitive information placed them at
substantial risk of identity theft, financial account
fraud, and invasion of privacy. However, the
attorney did not reveal to the court that an
independent expert had evaluated the company’s
use of the consumers’ sensitive information and
concluded that reasonable safeguards were in
place to protect the information.
Is the attorney subject to discipline?
(A) No, because the attorney had a good-faith
basis for his argument.
(B) No, because the attorney would have
breached his duty of loyalty by disclosing the
expert’s opinion to the court.
(C) Yes, because the attorney engaged in ex
parte communications with the judge.
(D) Yes, because the ex parte nature of the
hearing required that the attorney inform
the court of material facts known to the
attorney.
D
An attorney recently obtained his license to
practice law after several unsuccessful attempts
to pass the bar. He set up a solo practice.
Through a mutual friend, a prospective client
contacted the attorney about representing her in
a disability claim before the Social Security
Administration. Although the attorney had no
previous personal experience with any type of
Social Security claim and had received no training
during law school with regard to such claims, he
reasonably believed that he could achieve the
necessary competence without unreasonable
delay or association with another attorney. He
erroneously assumed that the prospective client
was aware of his lack of experience through their
mutual friend. Therefore, the attorney did not
mention his lack of experience to the prospective
client, and the prospective client did not ask
about it. The attorney proposed to represent the
prospective client under a contingency fee
arrangement, but the prospective client declined
to engage the attorney, even though the fee
arrangement was reasonable.
Is the attorney subject to discipline?
(A) No, because no attorney-client relationship
formed between the attorney and the
prospective client.
(B) No, because the attorney reasonably
believed that he could achieve the necessary
competence without unreasonable delay.
(C) Yes, because the attorney failed to warn the
prospective client about his lack of
experience.
(D) Yes, because the attorney lacked experience
of any sort with regard to Social Security
claims.
B
A business owner hired an attorney solely to
prepare a contract for the sale of the business.
Shortly after the sale was completed, the
attorney learned from an employee of the
business that the owner had falsified the
business’s records in order to make the business,
which had been losing money for several years,
appear profitable. When the attorney confronted
the owner about the owner’s actions, the owner
acknowledged the fraud but refused to take any
action. The attorney contacted the buyer of the
business, who had used his retirement savings to
purchase the business, and revealed the owner’s
fraud.
Is the attorney subject to discipline for this
revelation to the buyer of the business?
(A) Yes, because the attorney breached the
duty of confidentiality the attorney owed to
the business owner.
(B) Yes, because disclosure was not necessary
to prevent reasonably certain death or
bodily harm.
(C) No, because the attorney did not learn of his
client’s fraud during the course of a
litigation.
(D) No, because the owner had used the
attorney’s services in the sale of the
business.
D
An attorney currently represents the owner of a
local hardware store in contract negotiations to
extend the lease of the building in which the store
is located. An authorized representative of a
large corporation that owns and operates a
nationwide chain of hardware stores has
contacted the attorney about representing the
store in negotiations with the neighboring
property owner for an easement to gain
additional access to the public roads.
Without obtaining the written, informed consent
of both the owner of the local store and the
corporation, can the attorney agree to represent
the corporation if the attorney reasonably
believes that he will be able to provide competent
and diligent representation to each client?
(A) No, because the conflict-of-interest rules
apply to transactional representation as well
as to representation in adversarial
proceedings before a tribunal.
(B) No, because the written informed consent of
each client is required when a concurrent
conflict of interest exists.
(C) Yes, because simultaneous representation in
unrelated matters of clients whose interests
are only economically adverse does not
typically constitute a conflict of interest.
(D) Yes, because the attorney reasonably
believes that the attorney will be able to
provide competent and diligent
representation to each client.
C
Attorney Alpha, a sole practitioner, recently
suffered a heart attack and was advised that she
could not return to work for six months. Alpha
delivered all of her clients’ files to Attorney Beta,
who is also a sole practitioner. Beta agreed to
review each client’s file promptly, take any action
necessary to protect each client’s interests, and
treat the information in the files as confidential.
Alpha then wrote her clients, advising each client
that the client’s file had been delivered to Beta for
review and for any action necessary to protect
the client’s interest, and that the client was free
to select another lawyer. Alpha knows that Beta
is a competent attorney. Beta did not accept the
file of any person whose interests were, or could
be, adverse to the interests of any of Beta’s own
clients.
Was it proper for Alpha to deliver the files to Beta
for review?
(A) Yes, because Alpha knows that Beta is
competent to protect the clients’ interests.
(B) Yes, because Beta agreed to treat the
information in the files as confidential.
(C) Yes, because given her medical condition,
Alpha’s delivery of the files was necessary to
protect the clients’ interests.
(D) No, because Alpha did not obtain the prior
consent of each client whose file was
delivered to Beta.
D
An attorney and a prospective client met to
discuss whether the attorney would represent the
client in a contractual dispute. During the
conversation, the potential plaintiff spoke to the
attorney about her litigation objectives and how
much she would be able to pay the attorney. As
they were wrapping up the meeting, the client
noticed a picture of the attorney’s teenaged son
on the wall. The client confided in the attorney
that she had a son the same age, but she had
given him up for adoption because she was an
unwed teenager when he was born. She told the
attorney that no one except her family knew
about the adoption, and she asked the attorney
to keep it confidential.
Is the information about the client’s pregnancy
protected by the attorney-client privilege?
(A) No, because the woman had not retained
the attorney when the conversation took
place.
(B) No, because the communication was not
relayed for legal advice.
(C) Yes, because the woman had a reasonable
expectation that she had established an
attorney-client relationship with the
attorney.
(D) Yes, because the woman had a reasonable
expectation that she had established an
attorney-client relationship with the
attorney, and she stated that the
communication was confidential.
B
A sole practitioner accepted a matter in which he
was to represent the potential buyer of a large
business. After the attorney accepted the case,
he realized that he represented the seller in a
pending divorce action. The attorney had already
begun working on the sale before he realized this
fact and became concerned that the seller would
have a problem with this arrangement. He
therefore disclosed the issue to the seller and
received written confirmation from the seller that
the attorney’s involvement was not a problem.
Months after the attorney began representing
these clients, they met in the lobby of the
attorney’s office, where the buyer learned that
the attorney represented the seller in a divorce
action. He confronted the attorney about the
issue that day. After talking to the attorney about
the sale, he grew more confident that the
attorney could still successfully represent him,
and he told the attorney that he did not have any
problem with the arrangement. The attorney
continued to work on facilitating the sale of the
business.
Is the attorney subject to discipline?
(A) No, because the matters are unrelated.
(B) No, because the attorney was not aware of
any conflict at the time he accepted the
buyer as a client.
(C) Yes, because an attorney may not represent
opposing parties.
(D) Yes, because the attorney did not receive
proper consent.
D
An attorney conducted a significant amount of
legal research to support a senior partner’s
defense of a business in an insurance fraud
lawsuit brought by the state attorney general.
Because the attorney only conducted research
related to jurisdictional issues, he did not learn
any material confidential information about the
substance of the insurance fraud lawsuit,
including information about the business, legal
strategies, or any facts that were in dispute. Two
years later, the attorney obtained a new job with
the office of the state attorney general, where he
was assigned to work on the ongoing insurance
fraud lawsuit. The attorney informed his former
senior partner of his new assignment, and after
consulting with the business, the senior partner
informed the attorney that the business had given
its written informed consent for the attorney to
work with the state attorney general on the
lawsuit. The attorney subsequently began
working on the insurance fraud lawsuit, but he
did so without first obtaining informed consent,
confirmed in writing, from the office of the
attorney general.
Was it proper for the attorney to work on the
insurance fraud lawsuit at the office of the
attorney general?
(A) No, because an attorney may not switch
sides during a lawsuit even with the
opposing party’s written informed consent.
(B) No, because the attorney did not obtain
informed consent, confirmed in writing,
from the office of the attorney general
before beginning work on the lawsuit.
(C) Yes, because the attorney did not learn any
material confidential information about the
lawsuit while working at his former law firm.
(D) Yes, because the business gave its written
informed consent for the attorney to work
on the lawsuit.
B
A client hires an attorney to represent her in a
civil commitment proceeding initiated by the
state. The client is now undergoing psychiatric
evaluation to determine whether civil
commitment should be ordered. The client told
the attorney that she intends to commit suicide
as soon as the tests are completed, and the
attorney believes that the client will carry out this
threat. Both suicide and attempted suicide are
crimes in the state. The attorney considers
informing the authorities of the client’s threat, but
decides not to do so. The client commits suicide
the evening the tests are completed.
Is the attorney subject to discipline for failing to
report a future crime that ultimately resulted in
the client’s death?
(A) Yes, because the attorney was under an
obligation to report information of a future
crime that was likely to result in imminent
harm to or death of a person.
(B) Yes, because as an officer of the court, the
attorney was under an obligation to report
knowledge of a future crime.
(C) No, because disclosure would have
breached the attorney’s ethical duty of
confidentiality.
(D) No, because disclosure in this case was
discretionary on the part of the attorney.
D
An attorney was convinced that his client was
suffering from dementia. The attorney spoke to
his client’s family physician and the client’s only
daughter to determine whether a guardian should
be appointed to monitor the client’s finances.
These were the only discussions the attorney had
ever had with either the physician or the
daughter. In these discussions, the attorney
revealed confidential information about a bank
account maintained by the client before learning
that the daughter and her mother were estranged
because the daughter had stolen from her mother
in the past.
Was the attorney’s revelation of the confidential
information proper?
(A) Yes, because the attorney was trying to
determine whether his client needed a
guardian.
(B) Yes, because the daughter had relevant
information to help determine whether the
client needed a guardian.
(C) No, because the attorney should not have
disclosed confidential information about a
client to others without prior court approval.
(D) No, because the attorney did not first
determine whether either the doctor or his
client’s daughter might act adversely to his
client’s interests.
D
