Welcome to the 75th #fiveforfriday!
No matter how long I live, I’ll always associate the #75 with one thing.
My earliest sports memories are of the 1975 Red Sox. My earliest specific recollection of a sporting event is of Game 3 of the ’75 ALCS vs Oakland. My parents made me go to bed way before the game ended, but my Dad woke me up to watch the final out: a grounder to 2nd that Denny Doyle snared & threw to Cecil Cooper to send the Sox to the World Series.
The rest is history, with the elation of Game 6 (above) soon giving way to the first soul-crushing (and tear-inducing) sporting defeat of my life: Yaz lofting a harmless fly ball to center, and Cincinnati winning the Series in 7 games.
Now, for my math-fan readers, “75” has a cool attribute. If you sum the digits, then add numbers Fibonacci-style, you eventually get back to . . . 75!
- 7+5 = 12
- 5+12 =17
I’m pretty sure that Da Vinci was the first to prove this, then hid the solution in his drawing of the Vitruvian Man. And that’s why the Sox were cursed in 75. Or something like that.
Onto the quiz.
- None. Open book, open search engine, text-a-friend.
- Exception: Question 5. We try to play that one honest.
- Unless stated otherwise, the Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct apply
- Team entries welcome, creative team names even more welcome
- E-mail answers to email@example.com
- I’ll post the answers & Honor Roll on Monday
- Please don’t use the “comment” feature to post your answers
- Please consider sharing the quiz with friends & colleagues
- Hashtag it – #fiveforfriday
The rules prohibit lawyers from asking clients to consent to conflicts that might arise in the future.
- A. True
- B. False
- C. True, but the rule only applies in criminal cases
What do these have in common?
- Expenses of investigation;
- Expenses of medial examinations; and
- Costs of obtaining and presenting evidence
Which is the most accurate answer?
An attorney shall not “prepare on behalf of a client an instrument giving the lawyer or a person related to the lawyer any substantial gift unless __________”
- A. The attorney or recipient is related to the client.
- B. The client gives informed consent
- C. The client gives informed consent, confirmed in writing
Rule 1.18 relaxes a lawyer’s duty of loyalty to prospective clients who meet with, but do not retain, the lawyer. There is another duty that Rule 1.18 does not relax. That is, a duty that the lawyer owes to the prospective client even though the prospective client chose not retain the lawyer.
What is the duty?
Following up on last week’s controversial column, I know that a few of my readers prefer a particular band to both the Beatles and the Stones.
Imagine a lawyer who is on the road, and maybe on the run. The lawyer says:
“Sitting and staring out the hotel window
Got a tip they’re gonna kick the door in again
I’d like to get some sleep before I travel
But if you gotta warrant I guess you’re gonna come in”
I’m not sure a lawyer satisfies the duty of competence by basing his or her understanding of criminal law/criminal procedure/constitutional law on the teachings of …….. who?