I’m not positive, but methinks this week’s is the largest Honor Roll ever!
Friday’s questions are HERE. Thanks to all who sent in responses. I especially enjoyed hearing & reading so many wonderful stories of grandmothers & grandfathers who sound so similar to mine. Today’s answers follow the honor roll.
- Karen Allen, Karen Allen Law
- Matthew Anderson, Pratt Vreeland Kennelly & White
- Penny Benelli, Dakin & Benelli
- Alberto Bernabe, Professor, John Marshall Law School
- Amy Davis, Bucknam Black Davis
- Beth DeBernardi, Administrative Law Judge, Vermont Dept. of Labor
- Andrew Delaney, Martin & Associates
- Robert Grundstein
- Tammy Ann Smith Heffernan
- Keith Kasper, McCormick, Fitzpatrick, Kasper & Burchard
- Melanie Kehne, Assistant Attorney General
- Jeanne Kennedy, King Mum, JB Kennedy Associates
- Patrick Kennedy, First Brother, My Web Grocer
- Aileen Lachs, Mickenberg Dunn Lachs & Smith
- Shannon Lamb, Pratt Vreeland Kennelly Martin & White
- Amanda Lee, Rich Cassidy Law
- Lon McClintock, McClintock Law Offices
- Jack McCullough, Project Director, Mental Health Law Project
- Jeffrey Messina, Bergeron Paradis Fitzpatrick
- Hal Miller, First American
- Robyn Sweet, CORE Registered Paralegal, Cleary Shahi & Aicher
- Carie Tarte, Pace Registered Paralegal, Maley & Maley
- Benjamin Traverse, Down Rachlin Martin
- Caryn Waxman, Barber Waxman
- Thomas Wilkinson, Jr., Esq, Cozen O’Connor
Each of the following words is in the name of its own rule. Three of the rules involve the same type of ethics issue. Which is associated with a different ethics issue than the other three?
- A. Prospective
- B. Meritorious
- C. Current
- D. Former
Rule 3.1 governs meritorious claims. Prospective, Current, and Former are types of clients for the purposes of the conflicts rules.
Attorney called me with an inquiry. She said “Mike, I have some questions about mental impressions, as well as internal notes and memoranda.” Most likely, what issue did Attorney call to discuss?
- A. The duty to report a client’s fraud
- B. The duty to act competently to safeguard client data stored in the cloud
- C. Duties to a client who suffers from a diminished capacity
- D File delivery & the question of “what is the file?”
I might have phrased this one poorly. Option “A” certainly could happen, as a lawyer’s mental impressions and notes might include information that must be revealed pursuant to Rule 1.6(b). However, here, I was getting at whether an attorney’s notes and mental impressions are part of “the file.” For more on this topic, including a link to an ABA Formal Advisory Opinion, see this post.
Fill in the blank. (two words)
Lawyer called with an inquiry. Lawyer said “client said she’s fine with it, so do you think that I have ________ ___________?”
I replied “Well, ‘she’s fine with it’ isn’t exactly the definition of _________ _________. Per the rules, it’s an agreement to a proposed course of conduct after you’ve adequately communicated & explained the material risks, and reasonably available alternatives to, the proposed course of conduct.”
Informed Consent, Rule 1.0(e).
Attorney called me with an inquiry. Attorney was concerned that her she and her firm had been “pwned.” What did we discuss?
Whether Attorney & Firm had:
- A. suffered a breach of electronically stored client data.
- B. fallen for a trust account scam.
- C. violated the rules while responding to a negative online review.
- D. been duped by an adversary who intentionally posted “fake evidence” on a social media platform.
Hello gamers! I wasn’t familiar with the term “pwned” until I read the ABA Journal’s cybersecurity tips.
Hint: in honor of my grandfather’s Chicago roots, and in anticipation of a blog I intend to post next week . . .
Lawrence Mattingly practiced law in Illinois. Once, he arranged a meeting between a client and federal agents/prosecutors who were trying to build a tax evasion case against the client. During the meeting, the client claimed “I’ve never had much of an income.”
Later, Attorney Mattingly provided Treasury agents with a letter in which he conceded that his client had, in fact, earned a substantial income over the previous 4 years. The “Mattingly Letter” was admitted at trial and used as evidence against the client. The client was convicted and sent to prison.
Who was the client?