Delayed post this morning. As a Celtics fan, I got caught up reading blogs trying to figure out if this weekend’s trade makes any sense. I’m on board with Tatum at #3. I’m luke warm on anything involving Jimmy Butler, and not at all interested in renting Paul George for a year.
Anyhow, I digress. Friday’s questions are here. Spoiler alert: the answers follow the honor roll.
- Karen Allen, Esq.
- Matthew Anderson, Pratt Vreeland
- Penny Benelli, Dakin & Benelli
- Alberto Bernabe, Professor of Law, John Marshall Law School
- Beth DeBernardi, ALJ, Department of Labor
- Robert Grundstein
- Anthony Iarrapino, Esq.
- Keith Kasper, McCormick, Fitzpatrick, Kasper & Burchard
- Patrick Kennedy
- Deb Kirchwey, Esq.
- Elizabeth Kruska, Esq.
- Jack McCullough, Director, Vermont Legal Aid Mental Health Law Project
- Hal Miller, First American
Attorney represents an organization in a matter. Opposing Counsel knows that Attorney represent the organization in the matter. Without Attorney’s permission, Opposing Counsel discusses the matter with a former employee of the organization. Which is most accurate?
- A. Opposing Counsel violated the rules.
- B. Opposing Counsel did not violate the rules. Rule 4.2, Comment , (“Consent of the organization’s lawyer is not required for communication with a former constituent.”)
- C. Attorney violated the rules.
Lawyer called me with an inquiry. I listened, then asked:
“has the clerk certified that the term of service is complete?”
What did Lawyer ask me if it would be okay to do?
Lawyer asked if it would be permissible to communicate with a juror. See, Rule 3.5(b) & (c).
Lawyer has actual knowledge that Client is going to commit a fraud. The fraud is reasonably certain to result in substantial injury to the financial interests or property of another. Which most accurate states Lawyer’s duty:
A. Lawyer must disclose Client’s intent.
B. Lawyer may disclose Clientt’s intent.
C. Lawyer must disclose Cient’s intent if Client used Lawyer’s services in furtherance of the fraud. Rule 1.6(b)(3).
D. Lawyer must not disclose Client’s intent – disclosure is required only if a client’s crime or fraud will result in the death of, or substantial physical harm to, someone other than the client.
By rule, in contingent fee cases:
- A. The fee must be calculated before expenses are deducted
- B. The fee must be calculated after expenses are deducted
- C. The rule is silent as to whether the fee is to be calculated before or after expenses are deducted
- D The fee agreement must specify whether the fee will be calculated before or after expenses are deducted. Rule 1.5(c).
Barry Zuckerkorn is the Bluth family’s inept & incompetent lawyer on the Emmy Award winning show Arrested Development. Whatever his fee, it was probably unreasonable.
In one episode, Zuckerkorn literally jumped over a shark that was lying dead on a pier. The scene was scripted in homage to a popular 1970’s-80’s TV show that starred the actor who plays Zuckerkorn.
- Name the actor and the 1970’s show in which he starred.
Henry Winkler. Happy Days. The hint: the origin of the phrase “jumped the shark” is the episode in which Fonzie jumped a shark on water skis .