Purchase a course multi-pack for yourself or a friend and save up to 50%!
5-COURSE MULTI-PACK $180
10-COURSE MULTI-PACK $300
Accelerated 1-year bachelor's program
Question 1
Jen Kahn retains you as counsel in her divorce from husband Cleo Paltroh. Jen is a tough-minded executive for an investment firm and knows how to play hardball. She wants you to put off a trial for divorce for as long as possible, using every means at your disposal. Jen figures she'll fight a "war of attrition" with Cleo. Jen thinks that as time goes by, Cleo will tire of spending so much on legal fees that he'll decide to settle on her terms. In order to satisfy your client, you file a host of extensions. Is this a breach of ethics, or a legitimate strategy?
Correct The reason for filing your extensions here was clearly to delay ' on the facts, you seem to have no other purpose. Model Rule 3.2 holds that you may not use tactics to delay 'for the purpose of frustrating an opposing party's attempt to obtain rightful redress or repose.' Therefore, your tactics constitute a breach of ethical duty to the opposition.
Incorrect! The reason for filing your extensions here was clearly to delay ' on the facts, you seem to have no other purpose. Model Rule 3.2 holds that you may not use tactics to delay 'for the purpose of frustrating an opposing party's attempt to obtain rightful redress or repose.' Therefore, your tactics constitute a breach of ethical duty to the opposition.
Correct
Incorrect!
Question 2
You represent Dan King, a rock concert promoter, in a contract dispute with Skybox Inc., owner of a few arenas in which you planned to hold shows. Right after entering into a contract with Skybox, King realized he could have gotten a better deal elsewhere he desperately wants to terminate the Skybox deal. Rumor has it Skybox is bleeding cash and is bound for bankruptcy. You figure that a delay in litigation with Skybox will serve wonders in terminating the contract. You also have good reason to suspect that the judge presiding over the King-Skybox case harbors a serious hatred towards King. You file a motion for the judge to recuse himself based upon your suspicions and analysis of the judge's conduct in the case. You and King are happy because the motion will delay a trial for a lengthy period, bringing untold harm to Skybox. Are you subject to discipline for delaying the case?
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct On the facts, your motion to have the judge recuse himself was made in good faith. Just because a consequence of the motion was the delay you originally sought does not mean that you were acting unethically in filing the motion. You acted with a 'substantial purpose other than delay,' (See Model Rule 3.2, Comment [1]), and therefore you would not be subject to discipline
Incorrect! On the facts, your motion to have the judge recuse himself was made in good faith. Just because a consequence of the motion was the delay you originally sought does not mean that you were acting unethically in filing the motion. You acted with a 'substantial purpose other than delay,' (See Model Rule 3.2, Comment [1]), and therefore you would not be subject to discipline
Question 3
Your client, Crazy Donna, asserts in a complaint that the father of her child, Ollie Gee, gave her a dreaded sexually transmitted disease. In fact, the disease was transmitted to Donna during her "liason" with Stevie Marvelous; Donna didn't want you or anyone else to find out about that. You tell Donna's story and serve the complaint to initiate suit against Ollie. Are you subject to discipline?
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct Model Rule 3.3, Comment [2] states that when it comes to pleadings, a lawyer ''is not usually required to have personal knowledge of matters asserted therein.' As such, you will not be subject to discipline due to drafting and serving Donna's false complaint.
Incorrect! Model Rule 3.3, Comment [2] states that when it comes to pleadings, a lawyer ''is not usually required to have personal knowledge of matters asserted therein.' As such, you will not be subject to discipline due to drafting and serving Donna's false complaint.
Question 4
You're involved in a personal injury settlement negotiation on behalf of the plaintiff, Don Tello. You're a new attorney and it's your first settlement conference. During the negotiations with the defense attorney, you claim that Tello refuses to settle for less than $100k. You quiver a bit, knowing that Tello told you he'd gladly accept $25k. Are you subject to discipline for a material misrepresentation of fact?
Correct
Incorrect!
Correct Generally, the Model Rules state that a lawyer may not knowingly misrepresent a material fact to anyone during the course of representation. See Model Rule 4.1(a). Negotiations for settlement, however, serve as an exception to the rule. In fact, the Model Rules hold that statements regarding the figure your client would be willing to accept during settlement negotiations (such as the one made in this case) do not qualify as statements of 'material fact.' See Model Rule 4.1, Comment [2].
Incorrect! Generally, the Model Rules state that a lawyer may not knowingly misrepresent a material fact to anyone during the course of representation. See Model Rule 4.1(a). Negotiations for settlement, however, serve as an exception to the rule. In fact, the Model Rules hold that statements regarding the figure your client would be willing to accept during settlement negotiations (such as the one made in this case) do not qualify as statements of 'material fact.' See Model Rule 4.1, Comment [2].
Question 5
Your longtime celebrity client, Mike Jaksin, undergoes rhinoplasty. He's not happy with the results. You look at his nose and fail to find anything wrong. Jaksin insists the surgery was botched, though you find no evidence to support his assertion. Jaksin pressures you to file a complaint, threatening to fire you if you don't. You learn that Jaksin's plastic surgeon, Dr. Nipp, is a fabulously busy doctor who receives numerous complaints and is quick to settle so that he can get on with his practice. You figure you'll file and Dr. Nipp will immediately call for a settlement negotiation especially given that Jaksin is a famous patient. You file the complaint. Are you subject to discipline?
Correct Without a reasonable basis in law and fact to sue, a lawyer who files a complaint is subject to discipline. Here, Jaksin's intent (and yours by association) was to force the defendant to settle ' it's essentially a case brought to 'harass' or 'maliciously injure.' See Model Rule 3.1, Comment [2]. Without a reasonable claim, a lawyer may not institute proceedings against a defendant.
Incorrect! Without a reasonable basis in law and fact to sue, a lawyer who files a complaint is subject to discipline. Here, Jaksin's intent (and yours by association) was to force the defendant to settle ' it's essentially a case brought to 'harass' or 'maliciously injure.' See Model Rule 3.1, Comment [2]. Without a reasonable claim, a lawyer may not institute proceedings against a defendant.