Model Rules Flashcards
What is MPRC 1.1?
MPRC 1.1 states that a lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation.
What factors does MRPC 1.1 identify as relevant in determining whether a lawyer has sufficient knowledge and skill to provide competent representation? (Q)
Under MRPC 1.1, relevant factors to consider in assessing a lawyer’s knowledge and skill include:
the complexity and specialized nature of the matter,
the lawyer’s general training and experience in the relevant field of law,
the preparation the lawyer can give the matter, and
the lawyer’s ability to consult with a more experienced or competent lawyer.
Is there a set standard for the amount of preparation a lawyer must do in a matter to provide competent representation? (Q)
No. There is no set standard for the amount of preparation a lawyer must do in a matter to provide competent representation. Rather, the necessary level of preparation will vary by case and client (e.g., a major litigation may require more extensive preparation than a routine, small matter). In addition, an agreement between a lawyer and a client that limits the scope of the representation might also determine how much work the lawyer must do on the matter.
In an emergency, may a lawyer provide legal assistance even if the lawyer is not competent in the relevant area of law? (Q)
Yes. In an emergency, a lawyer may give limited advice or assistance in a matter in which the lawyer does not possess competence, if involving another lawyer would be impractical. However, to protect the client from the possibility of bad advice, the lawyer should provide the least amount of assistance that is reasonably needed to respond to the emergency. MPRC 1.1 Cmt 3.
In affiliating with another lawyer to provide competent representation, should a lawyer obtain the client’s informed consent and discuss with the client how responsibility will be allocated among the lawyers? (Q)
Yes. In affiliating with another lawyer to provide competent representation, a lawyer should obtain the client’s informed consent and discuss with the client how responsibility for the representation will be allocated among the lawyers. This is especially important if the affiliated lawyers will provide services in other jurisdictions that might have different ethical rules from those that apply to the original lawyer. MPRC 1.1 Cmt 6.
In affiliating with another lawyer to provide competent representation, should a lawyer do so based on a reasonable belief that the additional lawyer will enhance the provision of competent representation to the client? (Q)
Yes. In affiliating with another lawyer to provide competent representation, a lawyer should reasonably believe that the additional lawyer will enhance the provision of competent representation to the client. Factors affecting the reasonableness of the affiliation may include:
the other lawyer’s education, reputation and experience;
the nature and scope of the work assigned to the other lawyer; and
the rules of professional conduct, including rules of confidentiality, that apply in the jurisdiction in which the additional lawyer will render services. MPRC 1.1 Cmt. 6.
What is a summary of model rule 1.2(a)? (Q)
Model Rule 1.2(a) gives the client the ultimate authority to determine the scope of the attorney-client relationship. Lawyers are expected to “reasonably consult” with their clients throughout the representation to determine if the scope has changed, and to determine the means to reach the client’s goals.
What does model rule 1.2(a) discuss? (Q)
Under MPRC 1.2(a), the client holds the ultimate authority to set the scope and goals of the representation.
1.2 Authority
What is a summary of model rule 1.2(c)? (Q)
Model Rule 1.2(c) gives the lawyer the ability to limit the scope of the representation, but only when the limitation is reasonable under the circumstances and when the client gives informed consent to the limitation. In the ideal attorney-client relationship, the attorney gives deference to the client’s concerns about how to reach his goals, and the client gives deference to the lawyer’s expertise.
Circumstances and scope
What does MPRC 1.2(d) discuss? (Q)
MPRC 1.2(d) expressly states that a lawyer shall not “counsel” or assist” a client in conduct that the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent. This rule seems straightforward, but can actually get a little tricky in practice, in part because the Rules do not define “counsel” or “assist.”
Don’t help with bad stuff
Under what circumstances in MPRC 1.2 does a lawyer have to defer to the client’s decision? (Q)
Model Rule 1.2(a) prescribes certain instances when the lawyer must abide by the client’s decisions during the course of their representation: in civil matters, the lawyer must follow the client’s decision about whether to settle; and in criminal matters, the lawyer must follow the client’s decision about what plea to enter, whether to waive a jury trial, and whether the client will testify.
What does MPRC 1.4 discuss? (Q)
MPRC 1.4 provides a general framework for a lawyer’s obligations for communicating with the client and explaining the legal strategy and details of the case.
14 students in MC class?
What does MPRC 1.3 state?
A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client.
What does MPRC 1.3 cmt. 1 state?
A lawyer should pursue a matter on behalf of a client despite opposition, obstruction or personal inconvenience to the lawyer, and take whatever lawful and ethical measures are required to vindicate a client’s cause or endeavor. A lawyer must also act with commitment and dedication to the interests of the client and with zeal in advocacy upon the client’s behalf. A lawyer is not bound, however, to press for every advantage that might be realized for a client. For example, a lawyer may have authority to exercise professional discretion in determining the means by which a matter should be pursued. See Rule 1.2. The lawyer’s duty to act with reasonable diligence does not require the use of offensive tactics or preclude the treating of all persons involved in the legal process with courtesy and respect.
What does MPRC 1.3 cmt 4 state?
Unless the relationship is terminated as provided in Rule 1.16, a lawyer should carry through to conclusion all matters undertaken for a client. If a lawyer’s employment is limited to a specific matter, the relationship terminates when the matter has been resolved. If a lawyer has served a client over a substantial period in a variety of matters, the client sometimes may assume that the lawyer will continue to serve on a continuing basis unless the lawyer gives notice of withdrawal. Doubt about whether a client-lawyer relationship still exists should be clarified by the lawyer, preferably in writing, so that the client will not mistakenly suppose the lawyer is looking after the client’s affairs when the lawyer has ceased to do so. For example, if a lawyer has handled a judicial or administrative proceeding that produced a result adverse to the client and the lawyer and the client have not agreed that the lawyer will handle the matter on appeal, the lawyer must consult with the client about the possibility of appeal before relinquishing responsibility for the matter. See Rule 1.4(a)(2). Whether the lawyer is obligated to prosecute the appeal for the client depends on the scope of the representation the lawyer has agreed to provide to the client. See Rule 1.2.
What does MPRC 1.3 cmt 5 state?
To prevent neglect of client matters in the event of a sole practitioner’s death or disability, the duty of diligence may require that each sole practitioner prepare a plan, in conformity with applicable rules, that designates another competent lawyer to review client files, notify each client of the lawyer’s death or disability, and determine whether there is a need for immediate protective action. Cf. Rule 28 of the American Bar Association Model Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement (providing for court appointment of a lawyer to inventory files and take other protective action in absence of a plan providing for another lawyer to protect the interests of the clients of a deceased or disabled lawyer).
What is a summary of MPRC 1.4? (Q)
Other communications with the client are held to a reasonableness standard, and really depend on the nature of the matter and the client’s reasonable expectations. Delaying communication with a client may be appropriate where disclosure would harm the client, but withholding information is never appropriate where it only serves to benefit the lawyer.
What does model rule 1.4(a)(1) discuss? (Q)
Model Rule 1.4(a)(1) explains the four instances in which lawyers are required to communicate with their clients by pointing back to Model Rule 1.2(a). Thus, a lawyer must communicate with his client, and abide by the client’s decision, in four instances: in civil matters, whether to settle; and in criminal matters, what plea to enter, whether to waive a jury trial, and whether to testify. The Comments to Rule 1.4(a) note that a lawyer should “promptly consult” with the client on these issues and obtain the necessary directives and consent before moving forward.
What does MPRC 1.4(a)(2) discuss? (Q)
1.4(a)(2) explicitly requires lawyers to “reasonably consult” with clients about their goals and about how to reach them.
What does model rule 1.4(a)(3) discuss? (Q)
Under Model Rule 1.4(a)(3), a lawyer is expected to keep the client “reasonably informed” about the status of the case, which means providing enough information that the client can effectively participate in the representation.
A person with 3 As is well informed
What obligation does a lawyer have to explain the legal arguments and details of a case? (Q)
Comment 5 to Rule 1.4 allows significant flexibility here, and says that it really depends on the complexity of the case and the capability and desire of the client to know the details.
What does comment 7 to rule 1.4 say? (Q)
Comment 7 to Rule 1.4, notes that delaying communication with a client may be appropriate where a client is likely to “react imprudently to an immediate communication.” Comment 7 provides an example of this: a lawyer may be justified in withholding a mental diagnosis from a client when the doctor making the diagnosis indicates that disclosure could harm the client. Second, the Comment notes that withholding information is never justified when the only reason is to serve the own lawyer’s interests or convenience. For example, a lawyer may not withhold the fact that he missed a significant filing deadline solely to protect his reputation. Finally, certain court rules or court orders may prohibit a lawyer from revealing information to a client. In these limited instances, withholding information is appropriate.
What does model rule 1.5 discuss? (Q)
Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.5 requires that a lawyer “shall not make an agreement for, charge, or collect an unreasonable fee or an unreasonable amount for expenses.”
No pay no thrive
What is a summary of model rule 1.5? (Q)
Model Rule 1.5 requires a lawyer’s fees to be reasonable in all circumstances. Whether a fee is reasonable may be analyzed using the eight factors listed in the Model Rules – including the difficulty of the matter, the lawyer’s skill and reputation, or a tight turnaround time – but that list is not exhaustive, and other factors may be relevant. Rule 1.5(d) requires that contingent fee agreements be in a detailed writing signed by a client, but contingency agreements are completely prohibited in certain domestic relations matters and when representing criminal defendants. Finally, Model Rule 1.5(e) requires lawyers from different firms who share fees to either share fees in proportion to their work, or agree to joint responsibility for the matter as a whole. All fee sharing between lawyers from different firms must be approved in writing by the client, and the total fee must also be reasonable.