Say ten witnesses saw your client run a red light and bash into an unsuspecting SUV driver, but your client insists on putting forth a case that the light was green when the accident occurred. You don't want to use this strategy, because a jury will never buy your client's story. Your client is angry that you will not do what he wants, especially considering the amount he's paying you per hour. Must you abide by your client's wishes?

Your personal injury client knows a lot about the law and courtroom procedures, having sued a couple of other people in the past for various injuries. In a case related to your client's broken arm, the opposition is running late in filing an answer to your complaint. The opposing lawyer, a sorority sister of yours, calls you up and asks kindly for a week-long extension for filing the answer. The client hears about this and smiles widely, assuming that he'll gain a nice tactical advantage if his adversary doesn't file on time. He tells you to refuse the adversary's request for an extension. You want to accommodate your friend, knowing you often find yourself in the same deadline-ridden situation and want to be known as a fair player. You approve the extension. Ethical problem?

Your client, Norman, is on trial for murder. A psychiatrist was called in to evaluate Norman. This way you'll see whether the insanity defense is available for your client. The psychiatrist does his job, and says that Norman is indeed insane but that if Norman discovers this, he'll become severely depressed and possibly try to kill himself. However, you need to consult with Norman about his defense. Must you tell him about the psychiatrist's findings so that Norman can decide whether or not to pursue the defense of insanity?