MPRE Practice Test 1

Question 1

An attorney and a restaurant owner entered into a reciprocal referral arrangement. The attorney agreed to prominently display ads for the restaurant in her office, and to mention the restaurant to all of her clients who requested a recommendation of a nearby place to eat. In return, the owner agreed to prominently display ads for the attorney’s firm in the restaurant and to recommend the attorney to any of his customers who indicated a need for the services provided by the attorney. The reciprocal referral agreement was not exclusive, and the clients and customers would be informed of the existence and nature of the agreement.

Is the attorney subject to discipline for entering into this agreement?

A) Yes, because she asked the owner to place ads for the firm in the restaurant.
B) Yes, because the agreement provided something of value to the restaurant owner in return for recommending the attorney’s services.
C) No, because she did not pay the restaurant owner for referrals.
D) No, because the agreement is not exclusive, and the clients and customers will be informed of the existence and nature of the agreement.

Answer 1

B) Yes, because the agreement provided something of value to the restaurant owner in return for recommending the attorney’s services.

Question 2

An attorney graduated from law school in one state but decided to open a solo practice in another state. Although the attorney took the bar exam in the other state, the new state accepted the bar exam scores and allowed her to joint the state bar. The attorney attended a continuing legal education class because she believed she had to do so, as it was required by the other state. However, upon further investigation, the attorney discovered that the new state did not require a lawyer to take continuing education classes. Because the attorney was trying to start a new business and continuing legal education courses were expensive, she decided to not take any continuing legal education courses until she had some clients. The state did offer free legal education courses, but these were given on the other side of the state, which was a very long drive from where the attorney lived. Instead, the attorney decided to keep up to date on law matters through her own independent study.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because cost is no excuse to not to take continuing legal education classes.
B) Yes, because the state offered free continuing legal education classes.
C) No, because the state did not require continuing legal education classes.
D) No, because the attorney planned to study on her own.

Answer 2

D) No, because the attorney planned to study on her own.

Question 3

An attorney worked for the state’s alcoholic beverage commission for over 20 years. During that time, she worked on cases prosecuting people for making and selling illegal moonshine alcohol. The attorney spent the last year of her employment with the commission investigating and leading a case against a large corn processor that was making illegal moonshine. To settle the state’s claim, the corn processor paid a large fine and stopped making the moonshine. The state then dropped its case. The attorney went into private practice soon afterwards. A woman who was poisoned after drinking the illegal moonshine sued the processor. The processor, who knew the attorney well, asked her to defend it against the woman’s personal injury claim.

Is the attorney subject to discipline if she represents the processor?

A) Yes, because the alcoholic beverage commission settled a claim with the processor while the employee was a commission employee.
B) Yes, because the attorney had substantial responsibility in the matter while employed with the alcoholic beverage commission.
C) No, because the woman’s claim is based on personal injury.
D) No, because the state settled its claim with the processor.

Answer 3

B) Yes, because the attorney had substantial responsibility in the matter while employed with the alcoholic beverage commission.

Question 4

An attorney represented a client in a complicated copyright claim. Because the case involved a lot of engineering details, the attorney asked another lawyer to help him with the claim without telling the client. The attorney would only use the other lawyer for direct examination and cross-examination of any engineering experts called by the plaintiff. The attorney agreed to take any of the lawyer’s fees out of his own pay so that the overall cost to the plaintiff would not be increased. At the end of the representation, the attorney presented the client with an invoice stating the name of the other lawyer and a detailed statement showing that the lawyer was only paid for the services that he provided.

Was the arrangement between the two attorneys proper?

A) Yes, because the overall cost to the plaintiff was not increased.
B) Yes, because the other lawyer only provided limited services in the case.
C) No, because the plaintiff was not advised of the association of the other attorney.
D) No, because the attorney provided the client with a written explanation of the other lawyer’s services when the representation was completed.

Answer 4

C) No, because the plaintiff was not advised of the association of the other attorney.

Question 5

An attorney represents a famous comedian in an action against a newspaper for libel. The case attracted a lot of publicity. After one of the pretrial hearings, as the attorney left the courthouse, news reporters interviewed the attorney. In responding to questions, the attorney revealed the identity of the reporter who wrote the article that allegedly libeled the comedian.

Is the attorney subject to discipline for making this statement?

A) Yes, because the identified reporter might be subject to public abuse.
B) Yes, because jurors might learn of the reporter’s identity.
C) No, because the statement relates to a matter of public record.
D) No, because the trial has not yet commenced.

Answer 5

C) No, because the statement relates to a matter of public record.

Question 6

Before leaving for private practice, an attorney worked as a city prosecutor. The attorney was contacted by a potential client who asked the attorney to defend him against a drug conspiracy charge. The charge was based on an investigation by conducted by the city police at the time the attorney worked as a prosecutor, but the attorney had nothing to do with the earlier investigation. The attorney said he was too busy to represent the client himself, but he recommended another lawyer in his firm for representation. The other lawyer was not as experienced as the attorney in criminal matters, but he was perfectly competent to represent the client in his defense.

Is the other lawyer subject to discipline if he represents the client?

A) Yes, because the attorney worked in the same firm as the other lawyer.
B) Yes, because the other lawyer was not as experienced as the attorney.
C) No, because the attorney had nothing to do with the earlier investigation.
D) No, because the other lawyer was perfectly competent to represent the client.

Answer 6

C) No, because the attorney had nothing to do with the earlier investigation.

Question 7

An attorney represented several different business clients. One of the claims had been filed over a year ago. The attorney discussed a possible trial date with the opposing lawyer and the court clerk. The other lawyer and the clerk said that they could do it at any time in the next three months. Because the attorney was planning a vacation and wanted as much time to prepare as possible, she asked for the latest possible date without first consulting the client. The attorney’s client would not be prejudiced by the delay, although the client had told the attorney that he wanted to get the claim over as soon as possible so he could attend to other business matters.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney did not consult with the client first.
B) Yes, because the client had told the attorney he wanted the claim over as soon as possible.
C) No, because the client was not prejudiced by the delay.
D) No, because the attorney wanted more time to prepare.

Answer 7

C) No, because the client was not prejudiced by the delay.

Question 8

An attorney represented a man and a woman accused of engaging in a drug conspiracy. At the beginning of the representation, both the man and the woman said that they were completely innocent and knew nothing about the conspiracy. However, three weeks before the trial, the woman told the attorney that she wanted to plead guilty and testify that, while she was involved, the man was the primary leader of the conspiracy and that she had only delivered drugs once or twice.

May the attorney continue to represent the man and the woman?

A) Yes, because he could request separate trials for the man and the woman.
B) Yes, because he does not have to call the woman as a witness in the man’s trial.
C) No, because the woman wants to plead guilty and testify against the man.
D) No, because there is sufficient time for another lawyer to prepare to represent the man or the woman.

Answer 8

C) No, because the woman wants to plead guilty and testify against the man.

Question 9

A judge was presiding over a highly publicized will dispute when she was called by one of her former law professors. The law professor taught at the only private law school in the state and had no personal interest in the matter. The judge told the professor that she thought the parties had done a poor job in explaining the applicable law. The professor agreed and sent the judge an email explaining the applicable law in a much clearer way. The judge followed the professor’s reasoning in making her decision and then deleted the email.

Was the judge’s action proper?

A) Yes, because the judge did not call the professor.
B) Yes, because the professor had no personal interest in the matter.
C) No, because the judge did not tell the parties about the professor’s explanation.
D) No, because the professor’s explanation was contained in an email that was later deleted.

Answer 9

C) No, because the judge did not tell the parties about the professor’s explanation.

Question 10

An attorney had an online advertisement that said he would handle any divorce that does not go to trial for $1,000. A woman hired the attorney, and while working on the divorce, the attorney discovered several difficult property ownership issues that needed to be sorted out. He told the woman that the property issues needed to be fixed before he could take on the divorce. The woman told the attorney to do whatever needed to be done to get the divorce finalized. The attorney fixed the property issues, an unforeseen tax issue, and then finalized the divorce. The attorney then sent the woman a bill for $10,000, which was a fair charge for his work. The woman paid the bill.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) No, because the attorney’s fee was a fair charge for his work.
B) No, because the other issues were unanticipated when representation began.
C) Yes, because the tax attorney agreed to the divorce representation and then added the property and tax issues.
D) Yes, because the attorney advertised that he would handle any uncontested divorce for $1,000.

Answer 10

D) Yes, because the attorney advertised that he would handle any uncontested divorce for $1,000.

Question 11

A certified public accountant proposed to an attorney who is a recognized specialist in the field of tax law, that the accountant and the attorney form a partnership for the purpose of providing clients with tax-related legal and accounting services. Both the accountant and the attorney have deserved reputations of being competent, honest, and trustworthy. The accountant further proposes that the announcement of the proposed partnership, the firm stationary, and all public directory listings clearly state that the accountant is a certified public accountant and that the attorney is a lawyer. The attorney will be the only person in the partnership who gives legal advice.

Is the attorney subject to discipline if he enters into the proposed partnership with the accountant?

A) Yes, because one of the activities of the partnership would be providing legal services to clients.
B) Yes, because the attorney would be receiving fees paid for other than legal services.
C) No, because the partnership will assure to the public high-quality services in the fields of tax law and accounting.
D) No, because the attorney is the only person in the partnership who gives advice on legal matters.

Answer 11

A) Yes, because one of the activities of the partnership would be providing legal services to clients.

Question 12

A client retained an attorney to appeal his criminal conviction and to seek bail pending appeal. The agreed-upon fee for the appearance on the bail hearing was $100 per hour. The attorney received $1,600 from the client, of which $600 was a deposit to secure the attorney’s fee and $1,000 was for bail costs in the event that bail was obtained. The attorney maintained two office bank accounts: a fee account, in which all fees collected from clients were deposited and from which all office expenses were paid, and a Clients’ Trust Account. The attorney deposited the $1,600 in the Clients’ Trust Account the week before the bail hearing. She expended six hours of her time preparing for and appearing at the hearing. The effort to obtain bail was unsuccessful. Dissatisfied, the client immediately demanded return of the $1,600.

What should the attorney do with the $1,600?

A) Transfer the $1,600 to the fee account.
B) Transfer the $600 to the fee account and leave $1,000 in the Clients’ Trust Account until the attorney’s fee for the final appeal is determined.
C) Transfer $600 to the fee account and send the client a $1,000 check on the Clients’ Trust Account.
D) Send the client a $1,000 check and leave $600 in the Clients’ Trust Account until the matter is resolved with the client.

Answer 12

D) Send the client a $1,000 check and leave $600 in the Clients’ Trust Account until the matter is resolved with the client.

Question 13

An attorney represents a client in commercial litigation that is scheduled to go to trial in two months. Over the past several weeks, the client has disagreed with almost every tactical decision that the attorney has made. Frustrated, the attorney finally said to the client that if she didn’t like the way he was handling the lawsuit, perhaps she should get another lawyer. The client was upset at the suggestion and accused the attorney of trying to get out of the case. Reasonably believing that he could no longer work effectively with the client, the attorney sought the client’s permission to withdraw from the representation, and the client reluctantly agreed. After giving the client sufficient notice to obtain replacement counsel, the attorney requested the court’s permission to withdraw from the litigation, but the court denied the request.

May the attorney withdraw from representation?

A) Yes, because the client agreed, and the attorney gave the client sufficient notice to obtain replacement counsel.
B) Yes, because the client made it unreasonably difficult for the attorney to carry out the representation effectively.
C) No, because the court denied the attorney’s request to withdraw.
D) No, because the attorney’s withdrawal would cause material prejudice to the client and the client’s agreement was not voluntary.

Answer 13

C) No, because the court denied the attorney’s request to withdraw.

Question 14

An attorney worked in the legal department of a large chemical corporation. The corporation was sued by a large environmental group. The corporation told the attorney not to settle under any circumstances because the corporation wanted to establish a legal precedent for the issue. The corporation also believed it had more available funds than the environmental group. The attorney believed that the corporation was making the wrong decision even though it had a valid good faith argument in its defense. Specifically, the attorney believed that the corporation had in fact acted immorally if not illegally and should avoid any publicity regarding the case.

Must the attorney withdraw as counsel in this case?

A) Yes, because the corporation is dictating the attorney’s legal decisions.
B) Yes, because the attorney does not believe in the corporation’s decision not to settle.
C) No, because the corporation’s defense can be supported by a valid good faith argument.
D) No, because the attorney is an employee of the corporation and must follow its instructions.

Answer 14

C) No, because the corporation’s defense can be supported by a valid good faith argument.

Question 15

A defendant was on trial for murdering her husband. The defendant’s sister testified as a witness and stated that the defendant had acted in self-defense. During her closing arguments, the prosecutor truthfully told the jurors that she did not believe the defendant’s testimony at all because the witness was the defendant’s sister.

Was the prosecutor’s statement proper?

A) Yes, because she truthfully believed that the witness was lying.
B) Yes, because she stated the reason for her disbelief.
C) No, because she made her statement during closing arguments.
D) No, because she told the jurors that she believed the witness was lying.

Answer 15

D) No, because she told the jurors that she believed the witness was lying.

Question 16

An attorney represented a defendant in a car accident. The defendant knew the plaintiff personally and told the attorney that the plaintiff was lying about how badly he was injured. The attorney hired a private investigator to talk to the plaintiff. The investigator followed the plaintiff to a gym, where it became clear that the plaintiff was not injured at all. The investigator went up to the plaintiff and told the plaintiff that he worked for the attorney. The plaintiff admitted that he was lying about the extent of his injuries, telling the investigator that he just wanted revenge for the defendant breaking his prized bird feeder.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) No, because the investigator revealed that he worked for the attorney.
B) No, because the plaintiff admitted he was lying.
C) Yes, because the private investigator followed the plaintiff to his gym.
D) Yes, because the attorney instructed the investigator to interview the plaintiff.

Answer 16

D) Yes, because the attorney instructed the investigator to interview the plaintiff.

Question 17

An attorney was retained by a woman to advise her in negotiating a separation agreement with her husband. The husband, who was not a lawyer, had decided to act on his own behalf in the matter. The attorney never met or communicated with the husband during the negotiations.

After several months, the woman advised the attorney that the parties had reached agreement and presented him with the terms. The attorney prepared a proposed agreement and presented him with the terms. The attorney prepared a proposed agreement that contained all of the agreed-upon terms. The attorney mailed the proposed agreement to the husband, with a cover letter stating:

“As you know, I represent your wife in this matter and I do not represent your interests. I enclose two copies of the separation agreement that I have drafted in accordance with my client’s directions. Please read the agreement and, if it meets with your approval, sign both copies before a notary and return them to me. I will then have your wife sign them and will furnish you with a fully executed copy.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney did not suggest that the husband seek the advice of independent counsel before signing the agreement.
B) Yes, because the attorney directly communicated with an unrepresented person.
C) No, because the attorney acted only as a scrivener.
D) No, because the attorney’s letter did not imply that the attorney was disinterested and the attorney did not give legal advice to the husband.

Answer 17

D) No, because the attorney’s letter did not imply that the attorney was disinterested and the attorney did not give legal advice to the husband.

Question 18

Ana attorney worked at a small law firm for several years on one very complicated oil and gas case. After the judge’s unexpected death, the attorney was appointed to be a judge in the court the case was pending in. The attorney had no financial interest in the case and no financial interest in the firm, although the case was worth several million dollars and had gained national attention. The attorney truthfully believed that she could rule on the case without being influenced by her former association with the firm.

Is it proper for the attorney to rule on the case?

A) Yes, because the attorney has no financial interest in the case or firm.
B) Yes, because the attorney truthfully believed she could rule without being influenced by her former association with the firm.
C) No, because the attorney did not obtain written consent from all parties involved.
D) No, because the attorney worked at the firm when the case was pending.

Answer 18

D) No, because the attorney worked at the firm when the case was pending.

Question 19

An attorney’s law firm regularly represented a large company in its international business transactions. The company became involved in a contractual dispute with a foreign government. The company invoked a mandatory arbitration procedure contained in the contract. Under the arbitration clause, each party was allowed to choose a partisan arbitrator and the partisan arbitrators were to choose an additional arbitrator to sit on the panel. The company selected the attorney to be on the arbitration panel. Neither the attorney nor his law firm had represented the company in connection with the contract with the foreign government. The arbitration was completed, and the company was awarded the sum of $100,000. The company then hired the attorney to enforce the award. The attorney obtained the consent of the other arbitrators before accepting the representation. He was successful in enforcing the award.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney should not have represented the company in a matter in which the attorney had been an arbitrator.
B) Yes, because the attorney should have declined the arbitration assignment in view of his law firm’s regular representation of the company.
C) No, because the attorney obtained the consent of the other arbitrators before accepting the representation.
D) No, because the attorney was appointed to the arbitration panel as a partisan arbitrator.

Answer 19

D) No, because the attorney was appointed to the arbitration panel as a partisan arbitrator.

Question 20

An attorney represented a client who was injured when the television antenna he was attempting to erect in his yard came in contact with a power line. As part of its defense, the manufacturer of the antenna near power lines. The client told the attorney that he had not seen a warning label. The client’s wife told the attorney that she had kept the antenna and the box it came in and that she saw no warning label anywhere.

When called by the attorney as witnesses, both the client and his wife testified that they had never seen a warning label. After their testimony, but while the trial was still in progress, the attorney learned from the wife’s sister that there indeed had been a warning label on the box, but that the wife had removed and destroyed it. When the attorney confronted the wife with her sister’s statement, the wife admitted destroying the label but insisted that her husband knew nothing about it. The attorney continued the trial, but made no reference to the absence of a warning label in his summation to the jury. Instead, the attorney argued that the warning label, even if seen, was insufficient to advise his client of the serious consequences that would ensue if the warning was not heeded. The jury found in favor of the manufacturer.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney called the wife as a witness and she gave perjured testimony.
B) Yes, because the attorney failed to take reasonable remedial action after he realized that the wife had given perjured testimony.
C) No, because the jury apparently disbelieved the wife’s testimony.
D) No, because the attorney did not rely on the wife’s testimony once he discovered the perjury.

Answer 20

B) Yes, because the attorney failed to take reasonable remedial action after he realized that the wife had given perjured testimony.

Question 21

A client hired an attorney to help him buy a large warehouse complex. A short time later, the FBI called the attorney and asked her several questions regarding the client’s finances, which the attorney had learned about in preparation for the warehouse complex deal. The client told the attorney that he knew that the FBI was investigating him for a large financial securities fraud scheme that had occurred several years ago and to not tell the FBI anything. The attorney decided to answer the FBI’s questions, leading to his client’s eventual conviction for fraud.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) No, because the securities fraud scheme was not connected to the warehouse representation.
B) No, because the FBI was investigating the client’s security fraud scheme.
C) Yes, because the client told the attorney not to provide the information to the FBI.
D) Yes, because the client’s finances were necessarily tied to both the securities fraud scheme and the warehouse complex purchase.

Answer 21

C) Yes, because the client told the attorney not to provide the information to the FBI.

Question 22

An attorney and a loan officer were friends. They entered into an agreement where the attorney would recommend the officer to clients who needed loans in exchange for the officer recommending the attorney to clients who needed legal work. The attorney and officer did not share fees and both were noted experts in their fields.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney is compensating the loan officer for recommending his services.
B) Yes, because the attorney entered into an agreement with a non-lawyer to provide legal services.
C) No, because the attorney and officer did not share fees
D) No, because the attorney and officer are friends and noted experts in their fields.

Answer 22

A) Yes, because the attorney is compensating the loan officer for recommending his services.

Question 23

An attorney represented a responded in proceedings instituted by a child protection services agency to establish the paternity of a child and to recover past-due child support. The mother of the child had refused to file a complaint, had refused to retain a lawyer, and in fact had asked that the agency not file any action whatsoever. However, state law permitted the agency to commence paternity and support proceedings in its own name in such circumstances.

The attorney contacted the mother without the knowledge or consent of the agency or its lawyers. The attorney identified himself to the mother as “an officer of the court” and told the mother that he was investigating the matter. Based upon what she told him, the attorney prepared and the mother signed an affidavit truthfully stating that the respondent was not the father of the child.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney acted without the knowledge or consent of the agency or its lawyers.
B) Yes, because the attorney implied that he was disinterested in the matter.
C) No, because all of the attorney’s statements to the mother were true.
D) No, because the attorney did not give the mother legal advice.

Answer 23

B) Yes, because the attorney implied that he was disinterested in the matter.

Question 24

An attorney worked part-time as a county criminal prosecutor, but also kept a private practice. The attorney prosecuted a man for sabotaging the county’s power plant, resulting in a conviction. A local business owner asked the attorney to represent him in a private suit against the man for damages caused to his business from the power outage. The attorney agreed to the representation and filed a private civil suit against the man.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney did not receive the man’s consent before agreeing to the representation.
B) Yes, because the attorney prosecuted the man for the sabotage.
C) No, because the man was convicted.
D) No, because the attorney represented the county, not the man, in the earlier case.

Answer 24

B) Yes, because the attorney prosecuted the man for the sabotage.

Question 25

An attorney represented a large corporation that was being sued by a small business. The attorney knew that the lawyer representing the business owner never settled anything. The attorney knew a friend of the small business owner, so he asked the friend to go to talk to the business owner and offer a settlement. The friend spoke with the business owner, who agreed to the settlement because it was more than fair. In gratitude, the attorney gave the friend a nice bottle of wine.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because he knew another lawyer was representing the business owner.
B) Yes, because he paid the friend for his help.
C) No, because the attorney knew that the other lawyer never settled.
D) No, because business owner thought the settlement was more than fair.

Answer 25

A) Yes, because he knew another lawyer was representing the business owner.

Question 26

An attorney and three friends decided to form a law firm as a limited liability corporation. They had trouble hiring a qualified office manager, so they hired a woman who was given the title of vice-president. Because the woman was not a lawyer, the woman made no decisions regarding clients’ cases, although she did aid the attorneys with scheduling issues. The four attorneys in the firm were also officers in the corporation along with the woman.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the woman is an officer in the corporation.
B) Yes, because the woman handles attorney scheduling.
C) No, because the corporation’s leadership is predominantly lawyers.
D) No, because the woman does not participate in any decision regarding a client’s case.

Answer 26

A) Yes, because the woman is an officer in the corporation.

Question 27

An attorney represented a defendant in a kidnapping that gained international attention. The defendant told the attorney that he didn’t think he could pay the attorney any more money, but he could assign him any and all media rights that he had in the story. The story itself was so sensational that both the attorney and the defendant were fairly certain that the media rights would be valuable. The attorney agreed to the deal, although he told the defendant he should seek independent counsel before signing anything. The defendant said he didn’t want independent counsel and signed an agreement giving all media rights to the attorney.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the media rights might be worth much more than any reasonable attorney’s fees.
B) Yes, because the attorney agreed to the deal in the middle of his representation of the defendant.
C) No, because the defendant initiated the agreement.
D) No, because the attorney recommended that the defendant seek independent counsel.

Answer 27

B) Yes, because the attorney agreed to the deal in the middle of his representation of the defendant.

Question 28

A husband and wife asked an attorney to jointly represent them in a divorce. The husband and wife had agreed to divorce and there were no children involved. The attorney had both the husband and wife consent to the joint representation in writing and told them that if the divorce became contentious, he would withdraw and force them to start over with new attorneys. The attorney then agreed to the joint representation.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney agreed to joint representation in a divorce matter.
B) Yes, because the attorney said he’d withdraw if the divorce became contentious.
C) No, because the husband and wife gave their informed consent in writing.
D) No, because the husband and wife approached the attorney about the joint representation.

Answer 28

C) No, because the husband and wife gave their informed consent in writing.

Question 29

A plaintiff sued an attorney and the attorney’s former client over a stock sale that went wrong. The attorney and the client were represented by separate lawyers. The plaintiff subpoenaed the attorney for a deposition. During the deposition, the attorney revealed confidential information he obtained during his representation of the client because he believed it was necessary to defend himself. The attorney’s disclosure helped the attorney, but hurt the client’s defense.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney obtained the confidential information during his representation of the client.
B) Yes, because the attorney’s disclosure hurt the client’s defense.
C) No, because the attorney needed to disclose the information to defend himself.
D) No, because the attorney disclosed the information in response to a subpoena.

Answer 29

C) No, because the attorney needed to disclose the information to defend himself.

Question 30

The CEO of a large social media company hired an attorney to investigate company employees after several embarrassing facts about the CEO were leaked to the media. The leaks caused the company’s stock to lose value. The CEO gave the attorney a list of possible suspects and told the attorney not to tell them that they were suspects because he didn’t want to hurt employee morale or cause anyone to become offended and quit. The attorney agreed that telling the employees that they were suspects was a bad idea, as it might encourage them to lie. The attorney interviewed the employees, assuring each of them that they were not a suspect. After interviewing all of the suspects, the attorney discovered the employee who had leaked to the press.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney told the employees that they weren’t suspects.
B) Yes, because the attorney did not first advise the employees to obtain separate counsel.
C) No, because a lawsuit has not yet been filed agains the guilty employee.
D) No, because the attorney represented the company.

Answer 30

A) Yes, because the attorney told the employees that they weren’t suspects.

Question 31

A tech company sued a former employee for stealing company technology. The case was set for nonjury trial. The judge had been on the bench for 30 years and felt very uncomfortable with tech issues. The judge sent his law clerk over to the tech company to learn more about the technology that the employee allegedly stole. An employee at the tech company clearly and accurately explained the technology and how it was stolen by the employee. The law clerk went back to the judge and related what the employee had told him. At trial, another employee testified and that employee’s testimony supported what the first employee had told the clerk. The judge ruled in the company’s favor.

Was the judge’s conduct proper?

A) Yes, because the testimony at trial supported the verdict.
B) Yes, because the law clerk is a judicial employee.
C) No, because the judge could not have talked to the company himself.
D) No, because the judge did not feel comfortable with tech issues.

Answer 31

C) No, because the judge could not have talked to the company himself.

Question 32

An attorney helped a longtime client in the sale of his business. The buyer sent the attorney a check for the purchase and the attorney placed the funds in his Clients’ Trust Account. The attorney asked the client what he wanted to do with the funds and the client told the attorney to hold on to them for the time being because the client was involved in several other business transactions. The attorney needed to extend a loan to another client, so she took a small amount of the funds and made a loan to the other client. The other client accepted the loan and paid the funds back two months later with interest. When the attorney got the funds back, she told the client what he had done. The client said that he was fine with it and that the attorney could keep the interest.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney did not immediately pay the client the funds when she received them from the buyer.
B) Yes, because the attorney used the client’s funds to make a loan to another client.
C) No, because the client consented to the loan.
D) No, because the client told her to hold on to the funds.

Answer 32

B) Yes, because the attorney used the client’s funds to make a loan to another client.

Question 33

A man was accused of murder. The man told an attorney that he wanted to hire the attorney to defend him but had no money to do so. The attorney told the man that he really believed in his case, so he agreed to represent the man on the condition that the attorney would not be paid unless the man was found not guilty. In that case, the man would owe the attorney the standard fee. The attorney put the agreement in writing and the man signed the agreement.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney agreed to a contingent fee in a criminal case.
B) Yes, because the man was accused of murder.
C) No, because the man had no money to hire the attorney.
D) No, because the retainer agreement was in writing.

Answer 33

A) Yes, because the attorney agreed to a contingent fee in a criminal case.

Question 34

An attorney represented an environmental group suing a corporation for unlawfully disposing of hazardous waste in a public park. The corporation was represented by another lawyer who he attorney had faced many times in court. The lawyer told the attorney that the corporation’s CEO would be unavailable for trial because he was being transferred abroad. The attorney wanted to offer the corporation a settlement, but he knew that the other lawyer wanted to go to trial. The attorney called the corporation’s CEO and made a settlement offer that the CEO found fair. The attorney then contacted his client and the lawyer, and the settlement agreement was drawn up before the CEO was transferred.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) No, because the CEO would not be available for trial.
B) No, because the CEO found the settlement fair.
C) Yes, because the attorney spoke to the CEO before he spoke with his client.
D) Yes, because the corporation was represented by the lawyer.

Answer 34

D) Yes, because the corporation was represented by the lawyer.

Question 35

While an attorney’s main practice was with large corporate clients, he set aside part of his practice for poor clients who needed legal representation. Because he charged poor clients much less than corporate clients, he included language in a special retainer agreement for his poor clients that released him from liability arising from any representation. The attorney would not otherwise have represented poor clients because he believed they were more likely to file malpractice suits than corporate clients.

Is the attorney’s special retainer agreement proper?

A) Yes, because the attorney charged poor clients less.
B) Yes, because the attorney would not otherwise represent poor clients.
C) No, because the attorney is attempting to limit his liability for malpractice.
D) No, because the attorney does not require corporate clients to use the special retainer agreement.

Answer 35

C) No, because the attorney is attempting to limit his liability for malpractice.

Question 36

A lawyer came to an attorney and asked him to represent him in a conflict he was having with a mortgage company. The lawyer told the attorney that he had recently been in rehab for a cocaine addiction and, while he was addicted, he made false statements on a loan application. The lawyer also told the attorney that he had robbed three small grocery stores during that same period. The attorney was shocked and asked the lawyer if he was planning on doing it again. The lawyer said that he was not and had just gone a little crazy while he was addicted to drugs. The three grocery store robberies, and the attorney agreed to keep the robberies a secret.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the lawyer had committed three unsolved felonies.
B) Yes, because the three robberies raised serious questions about the lawyer’s ability to be a lawyer.
C) No, because the attorney learned of the robberies while representing the lawyer.
D) No, because there was no indication that the lawyer would ever commit robbery again.

Answer 36

C) No, because the attorney learned of the robberies while representing the lawyer.

Question 37

An attorney placed an advertisement online stating that he had a Juris Doctor and a medical degree from the state university. The advertisement also stated that the attorney was particularly interested in medical malpractice claims. As part of the advertising package, the advertisement would pop up whenever people did computer searches regarding doctors or medical care, although it would also show up during other non related searches depending on search engine usage. All of the information in the advertisement was true.

Is the attorney subject to discipline for placing the advertisement?

A) No, because the advertisement was mainly seen by people searching for doctors or medical care.
B) No, because nothing in the advertisement was untrue.
C) Yes, because the advertisement encouraged litigation by targeting people searching for doctors or medical care.
D) Yes, because the advertisement said the attorney specialized in medical malpractice.

Answer 37

B) No, because nothing in the advertisement was untrue.

Question 38

A client hired an attorney to represent her in a complex financial securities matter. In researching the issue, the attorney encountered a securities question that she didn’t know the answer to and which could be decisive to the case. The attorney explained the question to the partner without identifying the client. The partner then provided advice that ultimately benefited the client. Because it was standard procedure at the firm to bill for any of the lawyers’ work, the attorney added a fee for her consultation with the partner.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney billed the client for the consultation.
B) Yes, because the attorney did not obtain the client’s informed consent for the consultation.
C) No, because the attorney did not identify the client to the partner.
D) No, because the attorney and the partner work in the same firm.

Answer 38

D) No, because the attorney and the partner work in the same firm.

Question 39

A judge presided over pretrial matters for a large corporate fraud case. During pretrial proceedings, he obtained a large amount of background information that would ultimately be crucial to the decision. Shortly before the trial date, he learned that his daughter-in-law owned a lot of stock options in one of the companies possibly involved in the fraud. An adverse decision would likely decimate his daughter-in-law’s finances, but the judge prided himself on being able to keep his personal feelings and interests out of any decision that he made. The trial would likely be delayed if another judge had to take over the case. The judge informed all parties of his daughter-in-law’s interest.

Is it proper for the judge to hear the case?

A) Yes, because the judge informed all of the parties of his daughter-in-law’s interests.
B) Yes, because the case would likely be delayed if another judge had to take over.
C) No, because the judge’s daughter-in-law had a large financial interest in the outcome.
D) No, because there were no earlier proceedings not involving the judge where the parties could consent to him hearing the case.

Answer 39

D) No, because there were no earlier proceedings not involving the judge where the parties could consent to him hearing the case.

Question 40

An attorney represented a client accused of bank robbery. The client produced a friend who would testify that the client and the friend were together playing video games the night of the robbery. The attorney did some research and discovered that the friend was actually vacationing in Canada at the time the client and the friend was lying. The client told the attorney to call the friend as a witness because the attorney’s research was wrong, and even if he wasn’t playing video-games with the friend that night, he was probably playing video games with someone. The attorney called the friend as a witness, and the friend testified that he and the client were playing video games together the night of the robbery.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney did not inform the court of her findings.
B) Yes, because the attorney knows that the friend is lying.
C) No, because the client said that the attorney’s research was incorrect.
D) No, because the client insisted that the friend be called as a witness.

Answer 40

B) Yes, because the attorney knows that the friend is lying.

Question 41

A recently graduated attorney began a plaintiffs’ personal injury practice, but was having a difficult time attracting clients. The attorney hired an advertising agency to prepare a television commercial in which the attorney appeared to be arguing a case before a jury. In the commercial, the jury brought back a large award for the attorney’s client. The voice-over stated that results would vary depending upon particular legal and factual circumstances. The attorney’s only experience at the time the commercial was filmed was in moot court. As a result of airing the commercial, the attorney received several significant cases.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the commercial created an unjustified expectation about the results that could be achieved in court.
B) Yes, because the commercial implied that the attorney had successfully argued a case to a jury.
C) No, because the commercial speech is protected under the First Amendment.
D) No, because the commercial contained an express disclaimer about the results a client could expect.

Answer 41

B) Yes, because the commercial implied that the attorney had successfully argued a case to a jury.

Question 42

A judge attended the state law school as a student. In honor of the school’s 100th judicial reform and justice. The judge lived on the far side of the state, so the school bought two plane tickets for the judge and his wife and also put them up for the weekend in the fanciest hotel in town. Other practicing lawyers were invited to attend the judge’s talk and afterwards the school threw a fancy oyster roast. The judge’s transportation and lodging cost over $2,000. The judge accepted the offer and spent a lovely weekend with his wife at his alma mater and gave a well attended talk to the students and attorneys.

Were the judge’s actions proper?

A) Yes, because he was a graduate of the school that invited him.
B) Yes, because the judge gave a talk regarding judicial reform and justice.
C) No, because practicing lawyers who might appear before the judge were allowed to attend.
D) No, because the expensive trip gave the appearance of impropriety.

Answer 42

B) Yes, because the judge gave a talk regarding judicial reform and justice.

Question 43

An attorney regularly appears before a trial court judge who is running for reelection in six months. Over the past year, the attorney has noticed that the judge has become increasingly ill-tempered on the bench. Not only is the judge abrupt and critical of lawyers appearing before him, he is also rude and abusive to litigants. On more than one occasion, the judge has thrown his gavel across the courtroom in a fit of temper. The judge’s conduct on the bench is often the subject of discussion whenever a group of lawyers meets. Some lawyers are automatically filing requests for judicial substitution whenever a case in which they are to appear is assigned to the judge.

The attorney discussed the matter with her law partners, who rarely make court appearances. The attorney’s law partners suggested that she also file a request for judicial substitution whenever one of her cases is assigned to the judge. In addition, the attorney and her law partners discussed the possibility of reporting the judge to the appropriate disciplinary authority but are concerned that this would alienate the other judges to whom their cases are assigned. The attorney reluctantly started filing for substitution of the judge in every one of her cases to which the judge is assigned, but she has taken no further action.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney failed to inform the appropriate authorities about the judge’s conduct.
B) Yes, because, by filing automatic requests for substitution of the judge, the attorney undermined public confidence in the administration of justice.
C) No, because the attorney has a duty to represent her clients zealously.
D) No, because the judge is running for reelection and may not be reelected.

Answer 43

A) Yes, because the attorney failed to inform the appropriate authorities about the judge’s conduct.

Question 44

An attorney was hiking in the woods when he came upon another hiker who was in evident distress. The other hiker told the attorney that he had been bitten by a poisonous snake. The attorney had a radio on his person, so he called for park rangers to come render aid. While they were waiting for the rangers, the other hiker asked the attorney to write a will in case the other hiker died. The attorney told the hiker that he had never written a will before but would try his best. The attorney ripped a page off his book of maps and wrote a short will giving the other hiker’s possessions to his children. The other hiker signed the will just as the rangers arrived. Ultimately, the other hiker was rescued and recovered from his injuries. The other hiker then contacted a wills and estate attorney who wrote a new will for the other hiker.

Are the attorney’s actions proper?

A) Yes, because the attorney’s will was never used.
B) Yes, because the attorney acted reasonably under the circumstances.
C) No, because the attorney did not follow proper form when writing the will.
D) No, because the attorney had never written a will before.

Answer 44

B) Yes, because the attorney acted reasonably under the circumstances.

Question 45

Two newly licensed attorneys opened a law firm together. Neither of them knew anything about running a business. However, one of the attorney’s mothers was a retired office manager and bookkeeper. The mother offered to work at the firm for free as the firm’s office manager. The office manager duties included advising the two attorneys on fees and charges, keeping firm billing records, and consulting the attorneys about how to keep the firm solvent.

Is the arrangement with attorney’s mother proper?

A) Yes, because the mother is not helping with legal matters.
B) Yes, because the mother is related to the attorney.
C) No, because the mother is advising the law firm on fees and time chargers.
D) No, because the firm is not paying the mother.

Answer 45

A) Yes, because the mother is not helping with legal matters.

Question 46

An attorney is representing the plaintiff in a personal injury case on a contingent fee basis. The plaintiff told the attorney that her worry and anxiety about the pending litigation made it too difficult for her to work. Because the attorney believed in the case and the trial was set for only two months away, the attorney told the client that she would lend the plaintiff two months of living expenses. The attorney would then take the amount she lent to the plaintiff off the top of any recovery before the continent fee was determined. The attorney prepared a document in writing outlining the agreement, and the plaintiff signed it. The plaintiff’s claim was ultimately successful, and the attorney was paid back the money that she had lent the plaintiff as per the agreement, along with her contingent fee.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney lent living expenses to the plaintiff.
B) Yes, because the attorney took the amount she lent the plaintiff off the top of the plaintiff’s recovery before calculating her contingency fee.
C) No, because the plaintiff’s claim was successful and the attorney was paid back.
D) No, because the agreement between the attorney and the plaintiff was in writing.

Answer 46

A) Yes, because the attorney lent living expenses to the plaintiff.

Question 47

An attorney represented a grocery store in a slip-and-fall claim brought by a customer. The grocery store wanted to settle the claim quickly and offered a very generous settlement to the customer. The attorney sent the customer’s lawyer the settlement offer. After a week, the attorney still had not heard from the customer’s lawyer. The store informed the attorney that it would withdraw the settlement offer if the customer did not accept it within the next few days. The attorney knew that the customer’s lawyer was often swamped with different clients and she had had prior interactions with the lawyer where the attorney had to repeatedly contact the lawyer before getting any response at all. The attorney decided to send the settlement offer to the lawyer again and also send a copy to the customer so she’d know about it.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney sent the settlement offer to the customer.
B) Yes, because the attorney did not have the grocery store send the settlement offer to the customer directly.
C) No, because the attorney knew that the lawyer often overlooked clients’ cases.
D) No, because the grocery store would reject the settlement offer if it was not accepted within a few days.

Answer 47

A) Yes, because the attorney sent the settlement offer to the customer.

Question 48

An attorney represented a client in a bitter family dispute over the ownership of a large private beach. The opposing party offered a settlement, but the settlement required the attorney to agree not to represent the client in any subsequent proceeding related to ownership of the land. The opposing party told the attorney that he thought the attorney had unnecessarily prolonged the proceedings and had created a rift between all of the family members that might never be repaired. The attorney thought that the settlement was better for the client than anything the client could win at trial, although he didn’t think any attorney in the area was as experienced as him in similar matters. Ultimately, the attorney encouraged the client to agree to the settlement as written. Both the attorney and the client signed the settlement.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the settlement restricted the attorney’s right to represent the client.
B) Yes, because the attorney didn’t think any attorney in the area was as experienced as him in similar matters.
C) No, because the attorney thought that the settlement was better for the client than going to trial.
D) No, because the attorney could restrict his representation of the client if the client wanted him to do so.

Answer 48

A) Yes, because the settlement restricted the attorney’s right to represent the client.

Question 49

A company’s president telephoned his city’s best-known employment attorney and asked her to represent the company in a dispute that had just arisen with the company’s chief financial officer. The attorney, who had never previously represented the company, agreed. At the president’s insistence, she immediately commenced the representation. A few days later, during a meeting with the president, the attorney first revealed the amount of her customary hourly fee and then explained that the company would also be responsible for reimbursing her expenses. The president responded that her fee was higher than he had expected but that he would be happy for the company to pay it given her excellent work to date. Although the attorney intended to follow up with a confirming letter, she never did so. For several more months, she assisted the company in resolving its employment dispute. Afterward, she sent the company a bill accurately reflecting her hourly fee and expenses, which were reasonable.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because she did not disclose the basis of her fee before commencing the representation.
B) Yes, because she did not confirm her fee agreement in writing.
C) No, because she disclosed the basis of her fee within a reasonable time after commencing the representation.
D) No, because she was not required to advise the client of her customary hourly fee, unless requested to do so.

Answer 49

C) No, because she disclosed the basis of her fee within a reasonable time after commencing the representation.

Question 50

During closing arguments in a bench trial, the attorney stated “I bike on that path every week and I know that at the point my client crashed into the hiker, there was no possible way that my client could have seen her. There is a sharp curve and a tall drop. You should find my client not negligent because there was no way he could have averted the accident because of how dangerous that part of the path it.” There was no other evidence regarding the condition of the path. The attorney believed that his statements regarding the dangerous path were true.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) No, because the attorney believed that his statements readings the dangerous path were true.
B) No, because the attorney’s statements were made during a bench trial.
C) Yes, because the attorney asserted his personal knowledge regarding the path.
D) Yes, because there was no other evidence regarding the condition of the path.

Answer 50

C) Yes, because the attorney asserted his personal knowledge regarding the path.

Question 51

An attorney was friends with a man who was not a lawyer. The man was representing himself in small claims court. While the two friends were eating dinner, the man told the attorney about his claim. Even though the man did not ask for advice, the attorney gave the man advice that ultimately helped the man win his claim.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney assisted a non lawyer in the practice of law.
B) Yes, because the man did not ask for the legal advice.
C) No, because the man was representing himself.
D) No, because the man won his claim.

Answer 51

C) No, because the man was representing himself.

Question 52

A client hired an attorney to defend him from a criminal indictment for forgery. During a meeting with the client, the client told the attorney in confidence that before he had consulted with the attorney, be had committed perjury while testifying to the grand jury that indicted him. The attorney decided not to tell anyone about the client’s perjury.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the client committed perjury while testifying to the grand jury that indicted him for forgery.
B) Yes, because the client committed perjury while testifying to a grand jury and the attorney is an officer of the court.
C) No, because the attorney learned that the client committed perjury in confidence.
D) No, because the client’s perjury did not result in the client avoiding the indictment.

Answer 52

C) No, because the attorney learned that the client committed perjury in confidence.

Question 53

Attorney Alpha, a sole practitioner, recently suffered a heart attach 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 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 Beat 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 the Alpha did not obtain the prior consent of each client whose file was delivered to Beta.

Answer 53

D) No, because the Alpha did not obtain the prior consent of each client whose file was delivered to Beta.

Question 54

An attorney was a local judge for several years before leaving the bench and returning to private practice. A client had won a new trial on appeal of her case and wanted the attorney to represent her in her new trial. During the original trial on the matter, the judge hearing the case had become ill and the attorney had entered an administrative order pushing the trial back by three days so the judge could recover. The attorney agreed to represent the client in the new trial.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney acted officially as a judge with respect to an aspect of an earlier part of the claim.
B) Yes, because the attorney was a judge when the original trial took place.
C) No, because the attorney did not act as a judge with respect to a substantial matter in or the merits of the earlier part of the claim.
D) No, because the attorney is no longer a member of the bench.

Answer 54

C) No, because the attorney did not act as a judge with respect to a substantial matter in or the merits of the earlier part of the claim.

Question 55

An attorney decided to obtain a master’s degree in taxation, but lacked the funds required for tuition and expenses. The attorney consulted one of his clients, a wealthy banker, for advice about obtaining a loan. To the attorney’s surprise, the client offered the attorney a personal loan of $10,000. The attorney told the client that he would prepare the required note without a charge.

Without further consultation with the client, the attorney prepared and signed a promissory note bearing interest at the current bank rate. The note provided for repayment in the form of legal services to be rendered by the attorney to the client without charge until the value of the attorney’s services equaled the principal and interest due. The note further provided that if the client died before the note was fully repaid any remaining principal and interest would be forgiven as a gift.

The attorney mailed the executed note to the client with a transmittal letter encouraging the client to look it over and call with any questions. The client accepted the note and sent the attorney a personal check for $10,000, which the attorney used to obtain his master’s degree. A month after the degree was awarded, the client was killed in a car accident. The attorney had not rendered any legal services to the client from the date of the note’s execution to the date of the client’s death. Thereafter, in an action brought by the client’s estate to recover on the note, the court ruled that the note was discharged as a gift.

Was the attorney’s conduct proper?

A) Yes, because the client, without being requested by the attorney to do so, voluntarily made the loan.
B) Yes, because the court ruled that the note had been discharged as a gift.
C) No, because a lawyer may never accept a loan from a client.
D) No, because the attorney did not comply with the requirements for entering into a business transaction with a client.

Answer 55

D) No, because the attorney did not comply with the requirements for entering into a business transaction with a client.

Question 56

An attorney served as a state congressman immediately prior to reopening his law office in the state. The attorney printed and mailed an announcement of his return to private practice to members of the bar, persons who had previously been his clients, and personal friends whom he had never represented. The printed announcement stated that the attorney had reopened his law office, gave his address and telephone number, and added that he had recently served as a state congressman.

Is the attorney subject to discipline for the announcement?

A) Yes, because it was mailed to persons who had not been his clients.
B) Yes, because his service as a congressman is unrelated to his ability as a lawyer.
C) No, because the information in the announcement is true.
D) No, because all of the information was already in the public domain.

Answer 56

C) No, because the information in the announcement is true.

Question 57

An attorney hired a new associate for her office. A week after hiring the associate, the attorney was hired by a major political figure to defend him against a murder charge. The attorney was suddenly overwhelmed with interview requests, which she felt she had to accept to diligently represent her client. After almost missing a deadline in one of her other matters, she told the associate that he should spread out the attorney’s other clients among the office’s three paralegals and supervise them until the criminal case had calmed down. The associate did his best, but he wasn’t confident that he was supervising the paralegals correctly because he’d never represented actual clients before. The associate asked the attorney for help and she said she would help him as soon as she were able, but until that point, the associate should not bother her with questions.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the attorney is not supervising the associate’s work.
B) Yes, because the attorney has not gotten her other client’s consents for the new work agreement.
C) No, because the situation is only temporary until the criminal matter calmed down.
D) No, because the associate wasn’t confident that the paralegals were handling client matters correctly.

Answer 57

A) Yes, because the attorney is not supervising the associate’s work.

Question 58

A large retailer retained a law firm to represent it as it expanded its business into several new states. The retainer agreement between the firm and the retailer stated that the firm partners charged $300 per hour. The representation began and the firm sent the retailer monthly bills, which the retailer paid promptly. After three years, the firm decided to increase its hourly rate by $60. The firm sent a monthly newsletter over email to all of its clients that covered news and legal issues that the firm’s client might be interested in. In one of those newsletters, the firm included notice that it was increasing its hourly rate for all clients. After the notice was published, the retailer continued to pay its bills promptly for the next two years.

Are the firm’s partners subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the increase in hourly rate was over 10 percent.
B) Yes, because the retailer did not consent to the increase.
C) No, because the firm sent notice to all of its clients of the fee increase.
D) No, because the fee increase applied to all of the firm’s clients.

Answer 58

B) Yes, because the retailer did not consent to the increase.

Question 59

A sole practitioner was appoint to represent a criminal defendant on appeal. A recently admitted lawyer who shared office space with the sole practitioner agreed to write the brief if the sole practitioner would pay him one-half of the statutory fee. The defendant agreed to the arrangement in writing, after full consultation. The recently admitted lawyer entered an appearance as co-counsel for the defendant and, with the sole practitioner’s knowledge, applied for and received several extensions of time to file the the brief. Subsequently, the appellate court dismissed the appeal for failure to pursue the appeal. A third lawyer was later appointed to represent the defendant, whose conviction was affirmed after the appeal was reinstated.

Is the sole practitioner subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because he neglected the defendant’s case.
B) Yes, because he shared the fees with the recently admitted lawyer.
C) No, because the defendant agreed in writing to the co-counsel agreement.
D) No, because the affirmance by the appellate court indicated that the defendant’s appeal was without merit.

Answer 59

A) Yes, because he neglected the defendant’s case.

Question 60

A woman came to an attorney and asked him to represent her in a divorce. The attorney quoted his standard fee and the woman said that she could not afford to pay it. Instead, she asked if the attorney was willing to accept a payment of one-fourth of the amount of any alimony awarded in the case. The attorney was reluctant to take the case, but the woman said that her husband was abusive and she really needed to get the divorce as soon as possible. The attorney agreed, but told the woman his standard contingent fee was one-third of any financial word. The woman agreed and both parties signed a written retainer agreement.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

A) Yes, because the woman is retaining the attorney for a divorce.
B) Yes, because the attorney took advantage of the situation to ask for a higher fee.
C) No, because a lawyer may charge a contingent fee based on the outcome of a case.
D) No, because the woman asked the attorney for a contingent fee rather than an upfront payment.

Answer 60

A) Yes, because the woman is retaining the attorney for a divorce.