PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY QUIZ

FALL 1994

LAST 4 DIGITS OF SS #

This is a closed book/closed rules quiz for which you have

fifty minutes. Each question counts one point.

1) Must or subject to discipline asks whether the conduct

referred to or described in the question subjects the

attorney to discipline under the ABA Model Rules of

Professional Responsibility.

2) Should asks whether the conduct in question at least

conforms to the level of conduct expected of an ethical

attorney, as reflected in the Ethical Considerations of the

Code of Professional Responsibility and the rules and

comments of the Model Rules.

3) May or it is proper asks whether the conduct in question

is professionally appropriate in that it would not subject

the attorney to discipline and is not inconsistent with the

Ethical Considerations of the Code of Professional

Responsibility and the rules and comments of the Model

Rules.

, It is intended that there be only one correct answer for

each question. If you feel that there are two correct answers,

please pick an answer and state your reasoning briefly in the

margin .

1. Attorney represented Gail against Defendant in a products

liability suit. Defendant's attorney offered $500,000 in

settlement of Gail's claim on the condition that Attorney not

bring any similar suits against Defendant.

a) Attorney must agree to the condition if it is in the best

interest of Gail to accept the settlement offer.

b) Attorney may accept the condition and the settlement

offer with Gail's consent.

c) Attorney is subject to discipline if he agrees to the

condition.

d) Attorney may agree to the condition if there are other

attorneys available to bring products liability actions

against Defendant.

2) Attorney left the prosecutor's office after ten years to open

a criminal law practice specializing in DUI defense. For which of

the following is the attorney subject to discipline:

i) advertising that she is "a former prosecutor specializing

in criminal law," with the required disclaimer that ~State X

does not certify legal specialties."

ii) advertising that she had "a 90% conviction rate".

While a prosecutor 85% of the cases she handled were

resolved by guilty plea; of the remaining 15%, one third (5%

of the total) resulted in convictions, and two thirds (10%

of the total) resulted in acquittals.

iii) telling prospective clients that she is a close friend

and confidante of Judge Barnes, the judge who handles DUI

cases (this is true)

a) all of the above

b) (i) and (ii) but not (iii)

c) (i) and (iii) but not (ii)

d) (ii) and (iii) but not (i)

3) On the facts of (2), attorney would like to enter into a

business relationship with Barbara Bolin, who has built a

successful practice as an investigator. For which of the

following is attorney subject to discipline:

i) paying Barbara $500 for each case referred to her by

Barbara.

ii) forming a partnership with Barbara for investigation and

the practice of law.

iii)allowing Barbara to use her letterhead for letters that

Barbara wants to appear to be sent by an attorney.

a) all of the above

b) (i) and (ii) but not (iii)

c) (i) and (iii) but not (ii)

d) (ii) and (iii) but not (i)

4) While attending law school, Frank worked for Attorney as an

investigator. Attorney fired Frank after learning that Frank had

a serious drinking problem. Frank has now applied to take the

bar and the bar association has written Attorney, as a former

employer, for an evaluation of Frank's character.

a) Attorney must reply to the inquiry and report what he

knows of Frank's alcohol problem.

b) Though not required to do so, Attorney should reply to

the inquiry and report what he knows of Frank's alcohol

problem.

c) Though permitted to do so, Attorney should not reply to

the inquiry because Frank has not asked for a

recommendation.

d) Though permitted to do so, Attorney should not reply to

the inquiry because the conduct is unrelated to the practice

of law.

5) Bill sought advice from Attorney. Specifically, Bill told

Attorney he was delinquent in his child support and asked

Attorney to assist him in illegally hiding his assets from his

ex-wife.

i) Attorney is subject to discipline if, without Bill's

consent, she tells the ex-wife what Bill is planning.

ii) Attorney is subject to discipline if she tells Bill how

to illegally hide his assets.

iii) Bill's statements are protected by the attorney client

privilege.

Which of the above are true?

a) (i) and (ii) but not (iii)

b) (ii) and (iii) but not (i)

c) (ii) only

d) all of the above

6) Attorney is an estate planner. His wife, Laura, is a nurse.

One of Laura's patients, Sue, wants to give Laura $5000 in

appreciation for her kindness. Attorney prepares a codicil for

Sue to sign leaving Laura $5000.

a) Attorney is subject to discipline for preparing the

codicil

b) Attorney is subject to discipline only if it is shown

that Sue was subjected to undue influence

d) Attorney is not subject to discipline if he will not

personally benefit from the bequest

e) Attorney is not subject to discipline if the codicil was

witnessed by neutral witnesses

7) Attorney is asked by Sue to try to set aside a pre-nuptial

agreement. Attorney's investigation discloses a reasonable basis

for concluding that Harry, Sue's husband, concealed assets at the

time of the pre-nuptial agreement. Attorney calls Harry and asks

whether he is represented by counsel. When Harry replies that he

is not, Attorney says that he represents Sue and that suit will

be filed to set aside the pre-nuptial agreement unless a more

equitable arrangement can be worked out. Is Attorney subject to

discipline?

a) Yes, for talking to an adverse party who is not

represented by counsel

b) Yes, for threatening civil litigation in order to achieve

his client's goal

c) No, because Harry has engaged in fraudulent conduct

d) No, so long as Sue has authorized suit to be filed

8) M & N is a large law firm which represents the Updown Company

in many matters, including an anti-trust suit brought by Bisco. M

& N has just hired Carl, formerly with the firm of P & Q, which

is counsel to Bisco in the antitrust action. Bisco has moved to

disqualify M & N. While with P & Q, Carl worked for Bisco on tax

matters and knows nothing about the antitrust suit and knows

nothing that might be of value to Updown in the suit against

Bisco. Should the motion to disqualify be granted?

a) No, because Carl is under no duty to maintain the

confidences of Bisco after leaving P & Q.

b) No, because the litigation between Updown and Bisco is

not substantially related to the work done by Carl for

Bisco.

c) Yes, because of Carl's duty of loyalty to Bisco.

d) Yes, unless Carl is screened from the Updown/Bisco

litigation

9) M & N has also hired Dotty, who resigned her judgeship to

become a partner at M & N. While a judge, Dotty presided over the

Updown/Bisco litigation. Bisco has moved to disqualify M & N.

Should the motion be granted?

a) No, because Dotty did not represent Bisco

b) No, unless Dotty negotiated for employment with M & N

while presiding over the case

c) Yes, unless Dotty is screened from the litigation,

apportioned no part of the fee from it, with written notice

given to the court to ascertain compliance

d) Yes, because Dotty participated personally and

substantially in the litigation.

10) Edgar asks Attorney to incorporate his small business. Edgar

asks Attorney to take 10% of the stock as her fee. May Attorney

agree?

a) No, because she would thereby acquire a proprietary

interest in the business

b) No, because it is not known whether the business will

succeed or fail

c) Yes, if the arrangement is fair and reasonable, the

arrangement is in writing, and Edgar is given a reasonable

opportunity to seek the advice of independent counsel

d) Yes, because Edgar suggested the arrangement

11) Attorney represented Paul in a personal injury action without

a fee arrangement. The case was settled for $100,000. Attorney

then told Paul the fee would be 1~3 ($33,000). When Paul

protested Attorney told him she was escrowing the entire

$100,000. Rather than escrow the money, however, Attorney placed

the entire check in her personal account. Attorney and Paul

agreed on a fee of $25,000 and Attorney paid Paul $75,000. Which

of the following statements is true:

i) Attorney is subject to discipline for not entering into a

written fee arrangement with Paul

ii) Attorney is subject to discipline for not paying Paul

at least $67,O00 on receipt of the settlement

iii) Attorney is subject to discipline for placing the money

in her personal account even though Paul suffered no

financial loss.

* * * *

a) all of the statements are true

b) only (i) and (ii) are true

c) only (ii) and (iii) are true

d) only (i) and (iii) are true

12) Attorney was hired by two brothers, Cain and Able, who are

charged with possession of cocaine. Cain was driving Able's car

when he was stopped for a traffic offense. A large bag of cocaine

was found under the passenger seat. Attorney meets with the

brothers separately. Cain tells Attorney that he borrowed the car

from Able about an hour earlier and he doesn't know how the

cocaine got under the seat. Able tells Attorney there was no

cocaine in the car when Cain borrowed it. Which of the following

statements are true?

i) It is proper for Attorney to obtain informed consent from

Cain and Able and represent both

ii) On the prosecutor's motion the judge may disqualify

Attorney from representing both men even though Cain and

Able want Attorney to represent them

iii) If Attorney decides to represent only Cain and the

state calls Able as a prosecution witness, Attorney may not

cross-examine Able with information obtained in his

interview of Able.

a) all of the above are true

b) only (i) and (ii) are true

c) only (i) and (iii) are true

d) only (ii) and (iii) are true

13) Attorney is a member of the bar of State C. While on vacation

in State D, Attorney was arrested and convicted of misdemeanor

theft -- defrauding an innkeeper (he left without paying his

hotel bill). Is Attorney subject to discipline in State C?

a) No, because his conduct took place beyond the

jurisdiction of State C

b) No, because his conduct in State D was unrelated to the

practice of law

c) Yes, because his conduct in State D reflects on his

honesty and trustworthiness and fitness as a lawyer

d) Yes, because commission of any criminal act is grounds

for professional discipline.

14) Attorney was a passenger in a car driven by his friend Harry.

Harry's car was involved in an accident with Defendant. Harry has

asked 15) Betty asked her friend Ann to represent her in a personal

injury case. Ann is a tax lawyer and referred the case to her

partner Carla. Carla settled the case for $500,000, took a fee

of $100,000 and divided the fee with Ann. Is Ann subject to

discipline?

a) Yes, because she was not paid in proportion to her

services to Betty.

b) Yes, unless the total fee was reasonable and Betty

consented in writing to the division of the fee.

c) No, because Ann and Carla are partners.

d) No, because the reasonableness of a fee is not a matter

of professional discipline.

16) Attorney represented Bill and Carl in setting up a partnership. A dispute has now arisen, and Bill has asked Attorney to represent him in a personal injury suit against

Defendant. Attorney saw the accident and believes it was

Defendant's fault. Attorney and Harry have agreed on a contingent

fee and Attorney has agreed to advance litigation costs to be

repaid only in the event of a recovery or settlement.

i) It is not proper for Attorney to represent Harry because

he is a potential witness to the accident.

ii) Attorney is subject to discipline for advancing

litigation costs which are to be repaid only in the event of

recovery.

iii) Attorney is subject to discipline if the fee agreement

is not in writing.

* * * *

Which of the above are true?

a) all of the above

b) (i) and (ii) but not (iii)

c) (ii) and (iii) but not (i)

d) (i) and (iii) but not (ii)

17. Brian and his fifteen year old son, Charlie, were involved

in an accident when their car ran off the road into a tree.

Charlie was seriously hurt. Brian told the police he was the

driver and Charlie was the passenger. Brian's auto liability

policy is with Safeguard. Debbie, Charlie's mother and Brian's

ex-wife, sued Brian for Charlie's injuries and Safeguard retained

Attorney to defend Brian. Brian admitted to Attorney that Charlie

was the driver of the car and asked Attorney to-"go along with

the scam."

a) Attorney must notify Safeguard of the intended insurance

fraud.

b) Attorney may, but is not required to notify, Safeguard of

the intended insurance fraud.

c) Attorney must not notify Safeguard of the intended fraud

without Brian's consent.

d) Attorney must continue to represent Brian if Brian would

be harmed by Attorney's withdrawal from representation.

18. Assume on the facts of (17) that Attorney withdraws from the

representation and that a grand jury subpoenas him to testify to

what Brian told him. Safeguard instructs Attorney to testify and

Brian instructs him not to testify. A claim of the attorney

client privilege should be:

a) Sustained

b) Sustained because Brian did not attempt to commit a crime

involving death or bodily harm

c) Overruled because Safeguard is the holder of the

privilege

d) Overruled because Brian attempted to use Attorney to

perpetrate a fraud

19. Toxichem hired Attorney in connection with a claim by the EPA

that Toxichem was illegally dumping toxic wastes. Attorney

interviewed Driver, a Toxichem employee, who admitted dumping the

waste in the marsh. Attorney taped the interview and turned it

over to Baker, the general manager of Toxichem. Attorney told

Driver not to discuss the matter with anyone without first

contacting him. Attorney's advice to Driver:

a) subjects Attorney to discipline because it interferes

with EPA's investigation of the case;

b) subjects Attorney to discipline because Driver has

admitted to criminal conduct;

c) is proper if Attorney reasonably believes that Driver

will not be adversely affected by refusing to cooperate with

EPA;

d) is proper because Driver is required to obey the

instructions of Toxichem's attorney.

20. On the facts of (19) assume that Baker, general manager of

Toxichem, decides to admit to EPA that Toxichem engaged in

illegal dumping, but that Baker will claim that Driver's actions

were unauthorized and without the knowledge of other Toxichem

employees. Driver objects, on the basis of the attorney client

privilege, to Baker giving his taped statement to EPA. Driver's

claim of privilege should be:

a) overruled because the attorney client privilege is

limited to statements made by those in the control group;

b) overruled if Attorney explained to Driver at the time of

the interview that Attorney represented Toxichem and

Toxichem management would decide whether to release his

statement to EPA;

c) overruled if Driver has told anyone other than Attorney

about the dumping;

d) sustained.

21. Which of the following is not listed by the Model Rules as a

proper factor in setting the fee?

a) The fee customarily charged in the community;

b) The time spent on the representation;

c) The ability of the client to pay;

d) The results obtained.

22. Attorney is an active member of Save Kentucky, an

environmental group fighting to preserve rural parts of the state

from development. Developer wishes to hire Attorney to seek

industrial zoning for a large farm on the outskirts of town.

Attorney wishes to undertake the representation and reasonably

believes that her representation will not be adversely affected

by her membership in Save Kentucky. She believes, however, that

Save Kentucky will fight the development and she will lose the

respect of her friends if she represents Developer.

a) Attorney must obtain the consent of Save Kentucky to

represent Developer;

b) Attorney should tell Developer of her involvement with

Save Kentucky and obtain Developer's consent to the

representation.

c) Attorney should not tell Developer of her involvement

with Save Kentucky.

d) Attorney must decline representation of Developer.

23. Attorney represents Client, whose house burned down under

suspicious circumstances. Insurance Company suspects Client

torched his house for the insurance. Client sues Company on the

policy. Attorney interviews Neighbor, who says that he saw Client

set fire to the house. Which of the following will subject

Attorney to discipline:

i) Telling Neighbor not to talk to anyone about the case

without first contacting Attorney;

ii) Giving Neighbor $500 to move out of state;

iii) Answering an interrogatory served by Insurance Company

which asks for the identity of witnesses that may have seen

the fire, "There were no witnesses to the best of my

information and belief."

a) all of the above

b) (ii) and (iii)

c) (ii) only

d) (iii) only

24. Attorney represented Client in a divorce action. Without the

knowledge of Attorney, Client falsely testified that he did not

have an interest in a business owned by his brother. The judge

relied on this testimony in dividing the assets of the parties.

After the representation was over the brother told Attorney that

Client in fact has a $50,000 interest in the business.

a) Attorney must inform the judge of the false evidence on

which the judge relied.

b) Attorney may, but is not reguired to, tell the judge of

the false evidence.

c) Attorney must not inform the judge because the

information is within the attorney client privilege.

d) Attorney must not inform the judge because the

representation ended before he learned of the false

testimony.

25. Able practiced law under the name of Licking Valley Lawyer

Service, Inc. He died leaving his entire estate to his widow

Blanche. Blanche sold the practice to Attorney Charles under a

contract allowing Charles to use the trade name and requiring

Charles to pay Blanche $30,000 in yearly installments of $10,000.

Pursuant to the agreement Charles contacted existing clients,

informed them he had purchased Licking Valley Lawyer Service, and

gave them an opportunity to select other counsel. Charles is

subject to discipline for:

i) using a trade name;

ii) splitting fees with a non-lawyer;

iii) solicitation of persons with whom he had no pre-

existing attorney client relation.

Which of the above are true:

a) (i) and (ii)

b) (ii) and (iii)

c) (ii) only

d) none of the above