Yes, Prince wrote Manic Monday.
Before I get to the answers to Five for Friday, the questions are HERE.
- Andrew Delaney, Martin & Associates
- Robert Grundstein
- Ian Sullivan, Office of the Rutland County State’s Attorney
- Alli Wannop
- Matthew Little, Law Office of Matthew Little
- Lon McClintock, Law Office of Lon McClintock
- Kane Smart, Downs Rachlin Martin
- Hal Miller, some beach in Hawaii
Lawyer represents Nikki. Nikki stands charged with lewd & lascivious conduct in a hotel lobby. The State’s key witness is Apollonia. Several years ago, Lawyer prosecuted Apollonia while working as a deputy state’s attorney.
Which is most accurate under Vermont’s Rules of Professional Conduct:
- A. Whether Lawyer conflicts off Nikki’s case will most likely turn on whether Lawyer has confidential government information about Apollonia that could be used to Apollonia’s material disadvantage. See, Rule 1.11(c).
- B. Lawyer needs Apollonia’s consent, confirmed in writing, to represent Nikki
- C. Lawyer needs the State’s consent, confirmed in writing, to represent Nikki
- D. B & C
Attorney represents Plaintiff in a civil suit. The case is not going to settle and will definitely go to trial.
Attorney took the case on a contingent fee basis. Attorney and Expert can’t agree on a fee. Attorney thinks Expert’s fee to testify at trial is unreasonably high.
Attorney & Plaintiff learn that Expert is an avid collector of rare hats. Plaintiff happens to own a raspberry beret that is extraordinarily rare and quite valuable. Plaintiff tells Attorney that she’ll give the beret to Expert, but only if the jury returns a plaintiff’s verdict.
According to a comment in the Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct, is it generally proper or improper to to pay an expert witness a contingent fee?
Improper. See, Rule 3.4, Comment  (“The common law rule in most jurisdictions is that it is improper to pay an occurrence witness any fee for testifying and that it is improper to pay an expert witness a contingent fee.”)
Lawyer called with an inquiry. She told me that Client is concerned that Client and Lawyer were born under different astrological signs. Lawyer told me that there “ain’t no particular sign I’m more compatible with“ and that Client should act his age not his shoe size. Then she said, “but that’s not why I’m calling. I’m calling because I have an additional concern.”
Lawyer described her additional concern. I replied “generally, the duty is to take reasonable remedial measures, whatever that means. The comment to the rule suggests that the duty lasts until the conclusion of the proceeding.”
Given my reply, what was Lawyer’s additional concern?
- A. That she had overcharged Client.
- B. That Client had offered false testimony. See, Rule 3.3(a)(3), (b) and (c), and Comment 13.
- C. That Client is incompetent
- D. That she had discovered a conflict that she should have discovered much earlier.
Lawyer represents Client in a civil case pending in Washington County. Opposing Counsel filed a motion for summary judgment and supporting memorandum of law. The memo does not citeLittle v. Red Corvette, a decision from the Vermont Supreme Court that Lawyer not only knows about, but knows is directly adverse to Client’s position.
Which is most accurate under the Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct?
- A. Lawyer must disclose Little v. Red Corvette in her reply. See, Rule 3.3(a)(2).
- B. Lawyer must not disclose Little v. Red Corvette in her reply.
- C. If Client consents, Lawyer may disclose Little v. Red Corvette in her reply.
- D. Lawyer must report Opposing Counsel to disciplinary counsel.
Prince had 5 songs reach #1 on the Billboard charts. The last to do so was in 1991, shortly before the artist’s legal dispute with Warner Brothers led him to change his name to an unpronounceable glyph. Name Prince’s last song to reach #1.
Cream. Extra credit to Ian Sullivan for correctly stating that it was Prince & The New Power Generation.