Welcome to Monday! Friday’s questions are here. So many readers miss Bove’s! The answers follow today’s Honor Roll.
- Karen Allen, Esq.; Karen Allen Law
- Evan Barquist, Montroll Backus & Oettinger
- Penny Benelli, Dakin & Benelli
- CeCe Conrad, Costello, Valente & Gentry
- Honorable John M. Conroy, United States Magistrate Judge, District of Vermont
- Corinne Deering, PACE Registered Paralegal®. Paul Frank & Collins
- Erin Gilmore, Ryan Smith & Carbine
- Robert Grundstein, Esq.
- Glenn Jarrett, Jarrett & Luitjens
- Keith Kasper, McCormick, Fitzpatrick, Kasper & Burchard
- Thomas Kester, Assistant General Counsel, Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Vermont
- Elizabeth Kruska, President-Elect, VBA Board of Managers
- John Leddy, McNeil Leddy & Sheahan
- Tom Little, Little & Cicchetti
- Pam Loginsky, Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys
- Hal Miller, First American
- Herb Ogden, Esq.
- Kristen Shamis, Monaghan, Safar, Ducham
- Jonathan Teller-Elsberg, Vermont Law School, JD Candidate
- Thomas Wilkinson, Jr., Cozen O’Connor
Consider the following: (1) the time & labor required; (2) the results obtained; (3) the lawyer’s experience, reputation and ability.
Each is mentioned in the rule that governs:
- A. Competence
- B. Diligence
- C. Conflicts
- D. Fees V.R.Pr.C. 1.5
At a CLE, I give the following short answer to a question: “(1) the client gives informed consent; or (2) it’s impliedly authorized to carry out the representation.” Most likely, it was a question on the rule that governs:
- A. Conflicts of Interest – Concurrent Clients
- B. Conflicts of Interest – Former Clients
- C. Confidentiality of Information V.R.Pr.C. 1.6(a) (my comments are two of the exceptions to the rule against disclosing information relating to the representation.)
- D. Disbursed funds from trust in reliance upon a deposit that does not yet constitute “collected funds.”
Attorney called me with an inquiry. I listened, then said “the rule says that you can’t approach her in person, by phone, or by real-time electronic communication unless she’s (1) a lawyer; or (2) someone with whom you have family, close personal, or prior professional relationship.”
Who is the “she” I referred to in my response?
- A. a prospective client from whom Attorney wants to solicit employment. V.R.Pr.C. 7.3
- B. a juror.
- C. a represented witness in a matter in which Attorney represents a party.
- D. an employee of an organization that is represented in a matter in which Attorney’s client is adverse to the organization.
Last month, Lawyer served as a mediator in Oswald v. Ruby. The matter did not resolve at mediation. Now, Ruby wants to retain Lawyer in the same matter.
Which is most accurately states the rule? Lawyer:
- A. may not represent Ruby.
- B. may represent Ruby if both Oswald & Ruby give informed consent, confirmed in writing. V.R.Pr.C. 1.12(a)
- C. may represent Ruby if Oswald did not disclose in the mediation any information that could be “significantly harmful” if used against Oswald.
- D. B & C.
Yesterday, I blogged about lawyers convicted of crimes. Today, speaking of lawyers convicted of crimes, conspiracy theories and JFK . . .
. . . Jim Garrison gained fame as the District Attorney for New Orleans. In 1962, he accused several judges of racketeering and conspiring against him. The judges charged him with criminal defamation. He was convicted. However, on appeal, the United States Supreme Court overturned the conviction, concluding that the statute Garrison was charged with violating was unconstitutional.
Years later, Garrison began his own investigation into the JFK assassination. The investigation culminated with the arrest and trial of Clay Shaw for his alleged participation in a conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy. After a trial that took over a month, a jury needed less than an hour to acquit Shaw.
Garrison and the trial were featured in the Oliver Stone movie JFK. Kevin Costner starred as Garrison. Garrison himself appeared in the movie, playing a famous judge. The judge was involved in both the criminal defamation case against Garrison and an investigation of the JFK assassination.
Name the judge.