I guess it’s summer.
Friday’s questions are HERE. The answers follow today’s Honor Roll. And, speaking of the Honor Roll, there’s a first-time entrant this week: Professor Alberto Bernabe from John Marshall Law School. Professor Bernabe has a great blog on legal ethics. It’s HERE.
- Matthew Anderson, Pratt Vreeland Kennelly Martin & White
- Alberto Bernabe, Professor of Law, John Marshall Law School in Chicago
- Beth DeBernardi, ALJ, Department of Labor
- Robert Grundstein
- Keith Kasper, McCormick, Fitzpatrick, Kasper & Burchard
- Patrick Kennedy, First Brother, Dealer.Com
- Deb Kirchwey, The Law Offices of Deborah Kirchwey,
- Tom Little, VSAC
- Hal Miller, First American, Oceanside Division
- James Runcie, Runcie & Ouimette
- Allison Wannop, Law Clerk, Vermont Superior Court
- Easiest: Question 2
- Hardest: Question 1
The rules prohibit lawyers from asking clients to consent to conflicts that might arise in the future.
- A. True
- B. False. See, Rule 1.7, Comment . Conflict waivers require informed consent. It can be difficult to provide informed consent to waive a conflict that has yet to arise. Thus, per the Comment, “[t]he effectiveness of such waivers is generally determined by the extent to which the client understands the material risks that the waiver entails.”
- 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. Rule 1.8(c).
- 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?
The duty to maintain confidences. See, Rule 1.18(b). More specifically, the duty not to use or reveal information shared in the consultation except as required or permitted by rules 1.6 and 1.9.
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?
The Grateful Dead. Lyrics from the song Truckin’
As I mentioned Friday, I included this question for the several readers who responded to my Beatles v. Stones column by mentioning that they’re fans of the Dead. I’m not against the Dead, but I never got into them. In fact, my favorite “version” of Truckin’ is the snippet of the song that Tesla mixed into Comin’ Atcha Live during the sneaky good Live at the Trocadero performance that was recorded & released as Five Man Accoustical Jam.