Welcome to Monday. Friday’s questions are here. The answers follow today’s Honor Roll.
And, on Martin Luther King Day, here’s a quote from Dr. King that relates to the point I tried to make in the intro to the quiz:
“On that day the question will be, ‘What did you do for others?'”
- Karen Allen, Esq.
- Evan Barquist, Montroll Backus & Oettinger
- Alberto Bernabe, Professor, John Marshall Law School
- Liz Ryan Cole, Professor of Law, Vermont Law School
- Erin Gilmore, Ryan Smith & Carbine
- Bob Grundstein, Esq.
- Mark Heyman, General Counsel, Logic Supply
- Glenn Jarrett, Jarrett & Luitjens
- Keith Kasper, McCormick, Fitzpatrick, Kasper & Burchard
- Patrick Kennedy, First Brother, My Web Grocer
- Shannon Lamb, Pratt Vreeland Kennelly Martin & White
- Rob Lees and The Top Cheeeeese
- Pam Loginsky, Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys
- Lon McClintock, McClintock Law Offices
- Jack McCullough, Project Director, Vermont Legal Aid Mental Health Law Project
- Jeff Messina, Bergeron Paradis Fitzpatrick
- Hal Miller, First American
- Bill Pettersen, Pettersen Law
- Bob Pratt, Pratt Vreeland Kennelly Martin & White
- Random Hit
- Jim Runcie, Ouimette & Runcie
- Thomas Wilkinson, Jr., Cozen O’Connor
- Zachary York, Vermont Superior Court, Chittenden Civil & Criminal
- Peter Young, General Counsel, Vermont Rail System
In Vermont, if a prospective client meets with but does not retain a lawyer, the lawyer’s duty of loyalty is relaxed vis-à-vis the client, but another duty is not.
The duty of confidentiality. Rule 1.18(b)
There’s a rule that prohibits “qualitative comparisons” that cannot be factually substantiated. A disciplinary prosecution under the rule is most likely to involve:
- A. a frivolous pleading
- B. a statement made during closing argument in a jury trial
- C. extrajudicial statements made to the press that are likely to prejudice an adjudicative proceeding
- D. attorney advertising
With respect to the Rules of Professional Conduct, the phrase “acting through its duly authorized constituents” is in the rule on:
- A. the duties when representing an organization. Rule 1.13(a)
- B. lawyers holding public office
- C. firm names & letterhead
- D. the unauthorized practice of law
Here are 2 things I mentioned at CLE:
- last-minute changes to wire instructions;
- a prospective out-of-state client who claims to be owed money by a Vermonter, and who only communicates with you by e-mail
What topic was I discussing?
TRUST ACCOUNT SCAMS. Here are some of my posts on scams:
- Protect client funds, and your law license, by learning to identify trust account scams
- Change in wire instructions? CAUTION
- The latest scam
- Scams continue: beware ANY change in wire instructions
Question 5 (Fill in the blank)
I often blog about Rule 1.1’s duty of competence.
Some might argue that when the answer is relevant to a witness’s credibility, competence includes knowing how long it takes to cook grits .
Proponents of that theory would assert that Vincent Gambini complied with Rule 1.1 by asking that “so, Mr. Tipton, how could it take you 5 minutes to cook your grits when it takes the entire grit eating world __________ minutes?”
20. Vinny’s cross-examination of Mr. Tipton is here.