Five for Friday: #3

Welcome back!  Since this started, we’ve talked about tech competence, referral fees, and managing client expectations.  The response has been terrific.  As always, feel free to email me suggestions for future posts.

But it’s Friday.  So, on to the business at hand: this week’s quiz. They key question – can anyone keep up with Kruska and Gilmore???

Please email your answers to

Question 1:  Last night, during a meeting to discuss next week’s trial, Client told his Lawyer that Client intends to take his own life tonight.  Lawyer reasonably believes Client.  Under the Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • a – lawyer must not disclose Client’s intent
  • b – lawyer may disclose Client’s intent
  • c – lawyer must disclose Client’s intent

Question 2:  Vermont’s conflict rules do not prohibit common representation of multiple clients. However, a comment to the rules indicates that the risks posed by representation of multiple clients in a specific type of case is “so grave that ordinarily a lawyer should decline to represent” multiple clients. What type of case?

Question 3:  A lawyer calls me with an inquiry.  During the inquiry, I tell the lawyer that in 1997 the VBA issued an advisory ethics opinion that concluded that lawyers do not have an ethical duty to _______.  I tell the lawyer that most states agreed, but, now, states are re-thinking the issue.  I mention that “the availability of things like the Chrome extension ‘End-to-End’ ” might change the analysis.

Fill in the blank that’s above – what specific ethical consideration have we discussed?  It is not necessarily a one-word answer.

Question 4:  Another lawyer calls with an inquiry.  We spend some time discussing the meaning of the term “single source” as it appears in the Rules of Professional Conduct.  What topic did the lawyer call to discuss?

Question 5:  Name the lawyer who was part of O.J. Simpson’s “Dream Team” and has since been disbarred.