Mpre Ope 1

National Conference of Bar Examiners
Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination - Online

Practice Exam 1
Practice Exam 1
Question # 1
A business attorney entered into a partnership with a certified public accountant. The partnership provided legal and other
assistance to clients in connection with business and tax planning, tax filings, and other personal and corporate business
matters. The accountant performed only work that she was authorized to perform as a certified public accountant. The
attorney made reasonable efforts to ensure that the accountant did not interfere with the attorney’s compliance with his
professional obligations as a lawyer.
Is the attorney subject to discipline?
(A) Yes, because some of the activities of the partnership consisted of the practice of law.
Correct. This fact pattern presents the classic multidisciplinary practice of law issue. Lawyers and nonlawyers
may not practice together in a single entity co-owned by the two professionals or sets of professionals if the
entity delivers legal services. This answer is correct because it zeroes in on the fact that the partnership delivers
legal services.
(B) Yes, because lawyers may not form partnerships with nonlawyers.
Incorrect. There is no absolute ban on lawyer and nonlawyer partnerships. The rule prohibits only those
partnerships in which all or part of the services delivered are legal services. The lawyer could own part of this
entity with the accountant if, for example, the partnership delivered only accounting services.
(C) No, because the accountant performed only work that she was authorized to perform as a certified public accountant.
Incorrect. The accountant is a partner with the lawyer in the partnership, and that fact gives the accountant a
portion of the profits of the entity and control over the law aspects of the business. What the accountant does in
terms of work is not determinative.
(D) No, because the attorney made reasonable efforts to ensure that the accountant did not interfere with the attorney’s
compliance with his professional obligations as a lawyer.
Incorrect. It is true that the accountant should not interfere with the judgment of the lawyer. But that is not
enough. The accountant as a partner in the partnership has legal and managerial control over the attorney’s
practice of law, which is prohibited behavior. So the lawyer would be subject to discipline.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 2
An attorney is widely regarded as an exceptionally competent practitioner in the field of criminal law. A client of the
attorney became the subject of a grand jury investigation in a matter that could result in a felony indictment. The client
lacked sufficient funds to pay for the attorney’s services beyond the grand jury stage. He asked the attorney to provide
limited representation for a flat fee. Under the arrangement he proposed, the attorney would advise the client concerning
the grand jury investigation, but the representation would end when an indictment was returned or the grand jury decided
not to indict. The attorney fully advised the client of the practical and legal aspects of the client’s proposal.
Is it proper for the attorney to accept this limited representation?
(A) Yes, because the client and not the attorney suggested this arrangement.
Incorrect. Limitations on the scope of a representation will not be judged based upon whether they were
suggested by the lawyer or the client.
(B) Yes, because the attorney and the client may agree to limit the scope of the representation so long as the limitation is
reasonable under the circumstances.
Correct. A lawyer and client may agree to limit the scope of the lawyer’s representation as long as the client has
been fully informed. The limitation on the representation must be reasonable. In this case, it is entirely
permissible for the client and the lawyer to agree to a limited representation that covers only the client’s
involvement in the grand jury proceeding.
(C) No, because the attorney should not limit the scope of the representation based on the client’s ability to pay.
Incorrect. Lawyers do not have an obligation to provide free legal services to everyone. The ability to pay is
clearly one permissible factor in crafting a limited representation and, in this case, it puts the client in a better
position than if he were not represented by the lawyer at all.
(D) No, because the scope of the representation may not be limited in a criminal case.
Incorrect. The law of lawyering does not prohibit limited representations in criminal cases.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 3
An attorney represents a client who is under indictment for homicide. In the course of the representation, the client told the
attorney that she had previously killed two other people. These murders are completely unrelated to the murder indictment
for which the attorney is providing representation. With the client’s consent, the attorney made a tape recording of the
client’s confession regarding the unrelated homicides. At the attorney’s request, the client also drew a map of the remote
locations of the victims’ graves from the unrelated killings. Those bodies have not been found by the police, and the client
is not a suspect in either crime, both of which remain unsolved.
Is the attorney subject to discipline if he fails to voluntarily disclose to the authorities his knowledge of the two prior
murders and the locations of the victims’ bodies?
(A) Yes, because as an officer of the court, the attorney must disclose any knowledge that he has, whether privileged or
not, concerning the commission of the prior crimes by his client.
Incorrect. There is no exception to Rule 1.6(a), the confidentiality rule, permitting or requiring a lawyer to
disclose information relating to a client’s representation when the information concerns the client’s past crimes
of violence. There are exceptions allowing the lawyer to disclose client confidences in certain circumstances—
e.g., to prevent a future death or to prevent or rectify financial harm caused by a crime or fraud involving the
lawyer’s services—but these exceptions do not apply here.
(B) Yes, because the attorney is impeding the state’s access to significant evidence.
Incorrect. Criminal laws involving obstruction of justice, as well as judicial opinions, require a lawyer under
certain circumstances to disclose physical evidence of a crime when the lawyer possesses that evidence. But the
laws and opinions regarding obstruction of justice do not require disclosure of the client’s confidential
information in this case.
(C) No, because the attorney did not represent or advise his client with respect to the prior crimes.
Incorrect. The attorney’s knowledge is information “relating to the representation” of the client in the homicide
case, and therefore must be kept confidential under Rule 1.6(a), even though the information relates to murders
other than the one for which the client is on trial. The information about the undiscovered homicides would
potentially be relevant to the attorney in representing the client competently with regard to the crime charged.
For example, the lawyer’s knowledge of this information might influence the lawyer’s advice to the client about
whether to plead guilty or whether to testify at trial, and the information might influence the lawyer’s strategic
decisions.
(D) No, because the information was obtained by the attorney in the course of the representation.
Correct. In general, Rule 1.6(a) provides that “[a] lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the
representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent.” Further, no exception to the confidentiality
rule allows or requires the attorney to disclose the information.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 4
A woman has asked an attorney to represent her in obtaining compensation for a tract of land that is being condemned by
the state department of transportation to build a new highway. Two years ago, the attorney had been employed by the
department and had been assigned to search title on several tracts of land, including the one owned by the woman. The
attorney remembers a department engineer had drafted a confidential memorandum advising against running a new
highway across the woman’s land because of a potential adverse environmental impact. Because of this information, the
attorney believes it is possible to prevent the condemnation of the woman’s land or to increase the settlement amount.
What is the proper action for the attorney to take?
(A) Represent the woman on the issue of damages only and not disclose the information that might prevent the
condemnation.
Incorrect. Under Rule 1.11(a)(1), a lawyer who was formerly employed by a government agency may not later
represent a client “in connection with a matter in which the lawyer participated personally and substantially” as a
public employee, unless the government agency consents. Having participated personally and substantially in an
early stage of the condemnation matter by conducting a title search on the woman’s property, the attorney may
not now represent the woman in opposing or seeking additional damages for the condemnation.
(B) Represent the woman and attempt to prevent the condemnation by using the information about the adverse
environmental impact.
Incorrect. Under Rule 1.11(a)(1), a lawyer who was formerly employed by a government agency may not later
represent a client “in connection with a matter in which the lawyer participated personally and substantially” as a
public employee, unless the government agency consents. Having participated personally and substantially in an
early stage of the condemnation matter by conducting a title search on the woman’s property, the attorney may
not now represent the woman in opposing or seeking additional damages for the condemnation.
(C) Refuse to represent the woman but disclose to her the information about the adverse environmental impact.
Incorrect. The attorney may not disclose information learned while working at the department because, under
Rule 1.11(a)(2) and Rule 1.9(c), a lawyer who was formerly employed by the government must not reveal
information relating to a former representation.
(D) Refuse to represent the woman and not disclose the information about the adverse environmental impact.
Correct. Rule 1.11(a)(1) provides that a lawyer who was formerly employed by a government agency may not
later represent a client “in connection with a matter in which the lawyer participated personally and
substantially” as a public employee, unless the government agency consents. Having participated personally and
substantially in an early stage of the condemnation matter by conducting a title search on the woman’s property,
the attorney may not now represent the woman in opposing or seeking additional damages for the condemnation.
Further, the attorney may not disclose the information learned while working at the department because, under
Rule 1.11(a)(2) and Rule 1.9(c), a lawyer who was formerly employed by the government must not reveal
information relating to a former representation.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 5
An attorney who is a sole practitioner limits his practice to personal injury cases. He regularly places advertisements in
local newspapers, stating that his practice is limited to personal injury cases, including medical malpractice. After seeing
one of the attorney’s ads, a man approached the attorney for representation in a medical malpractice case. After a 30-
minute interview, the attorney told the man that he was too busy to take his case because it appeared quite complicated. He
further offered to refer the man to another lawyer who regularly practiced in the field. He reminded the man that he should
see another lawyer promptly before the statute of limitations expired and he lost his right to sue.
Although the attorney did not charge the man for the interview, the man was upset at wasting 30 minutes of his time. The
man did not contact another lawyer until eight months later, when he learned that the statute of limitations on his claim had
expired six months after his interview with the attorney. In fact, the man had a meritorious medical malpractice claim.
Is the attorney subject to civil liability?
(A) Yes, because the attorney falsely advertised his availability for medical malpractice cases.
Incorrect. Advertising in and of itself does not create an attorney-client relationship. The fact that the attorney
advertised in this manner did not require that he be available for all medical malpractice cases.
(B) Yes, because the attorney did not advise the man as to the date the statute of limitations would expire.
Incorrect. The attorney declined to accept the matter and gave the man information about another lawyer and
about the need to see that lawyer on a timely basis. The attorney did not have a duty to give the man the exact
date the statute would run, unless that date happened to be in a very short time, such as within the next day or
two.
(C) No, because the attorney did not violate any duty owed to the man.
Correct. The attorney talked to the prospective client, declined the representation, gave the man another lawyer’s
name, and urged him to contact that lawyer on a timely basis. Under Model Rule 1.18, the attorney did not owe
the man any other duty.
(D) No, because the attorney offered to refer the man to another medical malpractice lawyer.
Incorrect. The referral was not necessary under the rules, so that is not the reason why the attorney is not subject
to civil liability. After he declined to accept the matter, the attorney told the man that he should see another
lawyer on a timely basis. Under Model Rule 1.18, the attorney did not owe the man any other duty.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 6
An attorney is employed by a client who is a fugitive from justice under indictment for armed robbery. The attorney, after
thorough legal research and investigation of the facts furnished by the client, reasonably believes the indictment is fatally
defective and should be dismissed as a matter of law. The attorney advised the client of his opinion and urged the client to
surrender. The client told the attorney that she would not surrender.
The attorney informed the district attorney that he represented the client and that he had counseled her to surrender but that
she refused to follow his advice. The attorney has not advised his client on how to avoid arrest and prosecution and does
not know where she is hiding.
Is the attorney subject to discipline if he continues to represent the client?
(A) Yes, because the client is engaging in continuing illegal conduct.

Incorrect. Although it is true that the client is engaging in continuing illegal conduct, the client is nevertheless
entitled to the advice of a lawyer. So long as the lawyer does not knowingly counsel or assist the client in the
illegal conduct (Model Rule 1.2(d)), the lawyer may continue to represent the client.
(B) Yes, because the client refused to accept the attorney’s advice and surrender.
Incorrect. Although Model Rule 1.16(b)(4) grants a lawyer permission to withdraw if the client insists on action
that the lawyer believes is repugnant or with which the lawyer fundamentally disagrees, the lawyer is not
required to do so.
(C) No, because the attorney is not counseling the client to avoid arrest and prosecution.
Correct. Under Rule 1.2(d), a lawyer may not knowingly counsel or assist a client in illegal conduct, but in this
case, the lawyer has not done so.
(D) No, because the attorney reasonably believes the indictment is defective.
Incorrect. Even if the indictment is defective, the client’s conduct would still be illegal. Nevertheless, the lawyer
may continue to represent the client so long as the lawyer does not knowingly counsel or assist the client in the
illegal conduct.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 7
An attorney represented a real estate developer who was trying to buy several properties. The attorney arranged a meeting
with an owner of two large parcels of land, hoping to arrange a sale to the developer. When the attorney scheduled this
meeting, he neither knew nor asked whether the owner was represented by counsel in the matter. Shortly after the meeting
began, the owner disclosed that he had retained counsel to assist in the sale of the two parcels of land, but that his lawyer
could not be present that day. He further stated that he would be meeting with his lawyer the next day. The attorney asked
the owner if they could talk anyway, and stated that he wouldn’t ask the owner to sign anything until his lawyer had a
chance to look over anything they discussed.
The owner, an experienced businessman and negotiator, agreed to continue as suggested, and a tentative agreement was
soon worked out.
Was the attorney’s conduct proper?
(A) Yes, because the owner knowingly agreed to continue the discussions without his own lawyer being present.
Incorrect. Model Rule 4.2 prohibits a lawyer from communicating about a matter with a person known to be
represented in the matter unless the person’s lawyer consents to the communication. The Rule applies even if the
represented person initiates or consents to the communication.
(B) Yes, because the attorney did not present the owner with any documents to sign during the meeting.
represented in the matter unless the person’s lawyer consents to the communication.
(C) No, because the attorney negotiated with the owner after learning that the owner was represented by a lawyer in the
matter.
Correct. Model Rule 4.2 prohibits a lawyer from communicating about a matter with a person known to be
represented in the matter unless the person’s lawyer consents to the communication.
(D) No, because the attorney failed to ascertain whether the owner was represented by a lawyer before beginning the
negotiation session.
represented in the matter unless the person’s lawyer consents to the communication. The communication is
prohibited, however, only when the lawyer knows that the person is represented. The rule imposes no duty to
investigate.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 8
An attorney represented a seller in negotiating the sale of his ice cream parlor. The seller told the attorney in confidence
that, although the business had once been very profitable, recent profits had been stable but modest. As the negotiations
proceeded, the buyer appeared to be losing interest in the deal. Hoping to restore the buyer’s interest, the attorney stated,
“The ice cream business is every American’s dream: happy kids, steady profits, and a clear conscience.” The buyer bought
the ice cream parlor but was disappointed when his own profits proved to be modest.
(A) Yes, because the attorney made a false statement of fact to the buyer.
Incorrect. Model Rule 4.1 prohibits lawyers from making false statements of material facts in negotiations.
According to the Comment, generally accepted conventions in negotiation, including certain types of statements
such as estimates of price or value, ordinarily are not taken as statements of material facts. In this case, to the
extent that the attorney may have exaggerated the value of his client’s business, this exaggeration would not be
considered a statement of material fact.
(B) Yes, because the attorney exaggerated the profitability of the business.
Incorrect. An exaggeration such as the one made by the attorney in this case is not ordinarily considered a
statement of material fact. Model Rule 4.1 prohibits lawyers from making false statements of material facts in
negotiations.
(C) No, because the attorney represented the seller, not the buyer.
Incorrect. Model Rule 4.1 prohibits lawyers from making false statements of material facts in negotiations. It is
irrelevant which party the attorney represents.
(D) No, because the attorney’s statement constitutes acceptable puffing in negotiations.
Correct. Model Rule 4.1 prohibits lawyers from making false statements of material facts in negotiations.
However, according to the Comment to this rule, estimates of price or value are generally not considered to be
statements of material facts.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 9
An attorney represented a client as a plaintiff in a personal injury matter under a standard contingent fee contract. The
client agreed to settle the case for $1,000,000, from which funds the attorney would receive $250,000. The client informed
the attorney that she planned to take $25,000 of the settlement funds and spend the money purchasing lottery tickets. The
attorney told the client that he disagreed with this plan and encouraged the client to take some classes on investing money.
The client agreed to take the classes, but still insisted on playing the lottery.
The attorney received the check for $1,000,000 three days before the client was to attend the investing classes. The attorney
held the check for one week, giving the client at least a few days of classes. The attorney then informed the client of the
receipt of the funds, disbursed the funds according to the agreement, and also furnished the client with an accounting. The
attorney told the client that he had delayed notice to allow time for the client to come to her senses. The client laughed and
said, “I guess your plan worked, because these classes have convinced me to invest my money in the stock market instead
of playing the lottery.”
(A) Yes, because the attorney had a duty to promptly notify the client of the receipt of the $1,000,000.
Correct. Rule 1.15(d) requires the lawyer to “promptly notify the client” upon receiving funds in which the client
has an interest. Here, the attorney deliberately delayed notifying the client for a week, until the client had been to
classes in investing.
(B) Yes, because the attorney gave unsolicited advice about nonlegal matters.
Incorrect. The lawyer was permitted to give this unsolicited advice. Rule 2.1 permits a lawyer who is advising a
client to “refer not only to law but to other considerations such as moral, economic, social, and political factors
that may be relevant to the client’s situation.”
(C) No, because the client did not object to the withholding of the notice and funds.
Incorrect. The lawyer’s failure to promptly notify the client of the lawyer’s receipt of client funds and to
promptly deliver the funds to the client, as required by Rule 1.15(d), is not excused by the client’s later failure to
object.
(D) No, because the attorney acted in the client’s best interest.
Incorrect. Rule 1.15(d) provides that the lawyer must promptly notify the client when the lawyer receives funds
belonging to the client. There is no exception when the lawyer thinks it would be best for the client to delay
notification.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 10
An attorney served two four-year terms as the state’s governor immediately prior to reopening his law office in the state.
The attorney printed and mailed an announcement of his return to private practice to members of the bar, previous clients,
and personal friends whom he had never represented. The printed announcement stated that the attorney had reopened his
law office, gave his address and telephone number, and added that he had been the state’s governor for the past eight years.
Is the attorney subject to discipline for the announcement?
(A) Yes, because the mailing included persons who had not been his clients.
Incorrect. Model Rule 7.3 prohibits lawyers from making in-person, live telephone, or real-time electronic
contact to solicit for pecuniary gain, but this communication does not fall within the banned behavior. It is an
advertisement governed by Model Rules 7.1 and 7.2. As a result, the communication is permissible so long as it
does not contain any false or misleading statements, which this announcement did not.
(B) Yes, because his service as governor is unrelated to his ability as a lawyer.
Incorrect. Model Rule 7.1 forbids only false or misleading communications in lawyer advertising. A truthful
statement about the attorney’s prior service as governor is not likely to create any unjustified expectations and is
therefore not misleading.
(C) No, because the information in the announcement was true.

Correct. The communication is an advertisement. Model Rule 7.1, which covers lawyer advertising, forbids only
false or misleading communications, and this communication was neither false nor misleading.
(D) No, because all of the information was already in the public domain.
Incorrect. Information in the public domain can still be either false or misleading. As such, communication of
that information might be prohibited under Model Rule 7.1, which forbids false or misleading communications in
lawyer advertising.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 11
An attorney practices law in the same community as a lawyer who is running for election as a state judge. The attorney has
frequently observed the judicial candidate’s courtroom demeanor in litigated cases. Based on those experiences, the
attorney believes that the judicial candidate does not have a proper judicial temperament. A local news reporter asked the
attorney how he would rate the candidate, and the attorney responded in good faith that he believed the candidate was
unsuited for the bench and lacked the proper judicial temperament for a judge. A local newspaper with a wide circulation
quoted the attorney’s remarks.
Were the attorney’s remarks proper?
(A) Yes, because the attorney was not seeking judicial office.
Incorrect. It would have been proper for the attorney to provide good faith opinions about the judicial candidate’s
qualifications even if the attorney had also been seeking judicial office, since such opinions promote the
administration of justice by assisting the voters in making informed electoral decisions. See Rule 8.2, cmt. [1].
As a candidate for public office, the attorney would have been required to comply with applicable provisions of
the Code of Judicial Conduct, but that code would not have forbidden the attorney’s comments.
(B) Yes, because the attorney believed the candidate was unsuited for the bench.
Correct. The attorney’s expression of good faith views about a judicial candidate’s qualifications was proper,
because “[e]xpressing honest and candid opinions on such matters contributes to improving the administration of
justice.” Rule 8.2, cmt. [1].
(C) No, because the remarks serve to bring the judiciary into disrepute.
Incorrect. Although false statements about judicial candidates can unfairly undermine public confidence in the
administration of justice, a lawyer’s good faith expressions of opinion about the judicial candidate’s
temperament, based on the lawyer’s experience, promote the administration of justice by enabling voters to make
informed decisions and are encouraged under Rule 8.2.
(D) No, because a lawyer should not publicly comment on candidates for judicial office.
Incorrect. False public statements about a judicial candidate’s qualifications are improper, but not all public
statements about judicial candidates are improper. On the contrary, honest and candid opinions are encouraged
under Rule 8.2.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 12
Under a state law, the court’s appointment of lawyers as special masters in certain proceedings is discretionary with the
court. A judge decided to appoint special masters in all such proceedings, regardless of their nature and complexity, and
decided that compensation for such appointees would be at a reasonable hourly rate. The judge believed that this practice
would ensure competent and impartial handling of every proceeding. The judge further decided to use published law
directories to compile a list of qualified prospective appointees.
Is the judge’s proposed practice proper?
(A) Yes, because it results in competent and impartial handling of the proceedings.
Incorrect. Achieving competence and impartiality does not justify making special master appointments in all
cases before a judge. 2007 CJC 2.13(A)(2) requires that a judge avoid making unnecessary appointments.
(B) Yes, because the appointees will be compensated at a reasonable hourly rate.
Incorrect. Even if a special master charges a reasonable rate, the judge may not make unnecessary appointments.
2007 CJC 2.13(A)(2) requires that a judge avoid making unnecessary appointments.
(C) No, because the practice may result in unnecessary appointments.

Correct. The practice of making appointments without reference to need will result in unnecessary appointments
and is therefore prohibited by 2007 CJC 2.13(A)(2).
(D) No, because the judge cannot use law directories to compile a list of qualified prospective appointees.
Incorrect. Nothing in the code prohibits a judge from using a law directory to make appointments.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 13
An attorney is a member of the bar and a salaried employee of a bank's trust department. As part of his duties, he prepares a
monthly newsletter concerning wills, trusts, estates, and taxes that the bank sends to all of its customers. The newsletter
contains a recommendation to the customer to review his or her will in light of the information contained and, if the
customer has any questions, to bring the will to the bank, where the attorney will review the customer's will and answer the
customer's legal questions. The bank provides the attorney's services to its customers for no charge.
Is the attorney subject to discipline for the foregoing?
(A) Yes, because by sending out the newsletter the attorney is giving legal advice to persons who are not his clients.
Incorrect. A newsletter does not provide legal advice about a particular client's problem, but just provides
generalized legal information.
(B) Yes, because the attorney is assisting the bank in the unauthorized practice of law.
Correct. A bank may not provide legal services to its customers through a salaried lawyer because banks are not
authorized to practice law. By providing these services, the attorney is assisting the bank in the unauthorized
practice of law.
(C) No, because no charge is made for the attorney’s advice.

Incorrect. A bank may not provide legal services to its customers through a salaried lawyer because banks are not
authorized to practice law. By providing these services, the attorney is assisting the bank in the unauthorized
practice of law, whether or not the customer is charged for the work.
(D) No, because the attorney is a member of the bar.

Incorrect. A bank may not provide legal services to its customers through a salaried lawyer because banks are not
authorized to practice law. The attorney may do legal work for the bank, but may not do legal work for bank
clients.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 14
A client retained an attorney to recover for a personal injury. In the retainer agreement signed by the client and the attorney,
the client agreed to cooperate fully and pay the attorney a contingent fee computed as a percentage of the amount of
recovery after expenses: 25 percent if settled before trial, 30 percent if settled before verdict, 35 percent after verdict, and
40 percent after appeal.
The attorney’s representation of the client in the matter extended over a three-year period during which the attorney
advanced a large amount for litigation expenses. After trial, the client obtained a jury verdict for an amount larger than
either the attorney or the client had anticipated. However, the defendant filed an appeal based on questions of evidence and
the measure of damages. Meanwhile, the defendant made an offer of settlement for approximately the amount the attorney
had originally projected as reasonable to expect. The client, who was hard pressed financially, directed the attorney to
accept the offer and settle. The attorney refused, because she was confident that there was no reversible error in the trial
and that the appeal was without merit. The attorney reasonably believed that the appeal was filed solely to gain negotiating
advantage in settlement negotiations.
(A) Yes, because the attorney’s percentage under the fee contract increased after appeal.
Incorrect. Although the percentage increase gives the attorney an incentive to favor going through the appeal,
this incentive does not create an impermissible conflict of interest.
(B) Yes, because the client directed the attorney to accept the settlement offer.
Correct. Under Model Rule 1.2(a), a lawyer must abide by a client’s decision as to whether to settle a matter.
(C) No, because the decision whether to settle or defend an appeal is a tactical matter for the attorney to determine.
Incorrect. Under Model Rule 1.2(a), a lawyer must abide by a client’s decision whether to settle a matter,
regardless of the procedural status.
(D) No, because evaluation of the merits of an appeal requires the exercise of independent professional judgment.
Incorrect. Although it is true that evaluating the merits of an appeal requires the exercise of independent
professional judgment, Model Rule 1.2(a) confers upon the client the ultimate authority to determine the
objectives of the representation and to make certain decisions, including a decision as to whether to settle a
matter.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 15
An attorney represented both the owner of an art gallery and a publisher. The gallery owner and the publisher each made a
practice of paying the attorney's fees in cash. The attorney received separate cash payments from the gallery owner and the
publisher on the same day. Each payment consisted of ten $100 bills, which the attorney immediately deposited in her bank
account. One week later, the attorney was contacted by United States Treasury agents, who informed her that four of the
bills had been identified as counterfeit. The agents did not accuse the attorney of knowingly passing the counterfeit money
but asked her who had given her the bills. The attorney was subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury and was asked who
could have given her the counterfeit money.
Is it proper for the attorney to provide the grand jury with the names of the gallery owner and the publisher?
(A) Yes, because negotiation of a counterfeit bill is a criminal act.

Incorrect. Under Rule 1.6(B)(6), the attorney may provide client confidences in response to a grand jury
subpoena unless the information may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, in which case the attorney
must assert the privilege unless the client waives it. In this case, the clients’ names are confidential under Rule
1.6 but are not protected by the attorney-client privilege. The privilege covers only confidential communications
between a client and a lawyer. It does not cover clients’ identities unless disclosing their identities will implicitly
reveal their confidential communications, which is not the case here. It is irrelevant that negotiating a counterfeit
bill is a crime. If the attorney’s information in this case was privileged, the attorney could not disclose it under
the “crime-fraud” exception, even though passing counterfeit money is a crime, because the attorney does not
know which client paid with counterfeit bills and also does not know whether the client who did so was aware
that the bills were counterfeit.
(B) Yes, because under the circumstances neither client's identity is privileged.
Correct. Under Rule 1.6(B)(6), the attorney may provide client confidences in response to a grand jury subpoena
unless the information may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, in which case the attorney must assert
the privilege unless the client waives it. In this case, the clients’ names are confidential under Rule 1.6 but are
not protected by the attorney-client privilege. The privilege covers only confidential communications between a
client and a lawyer. It does not cover clients’ identities unless disclosing their identities will implicitly reveal
their confidential communications, which is not the case here.
(C) No, because counterfeiting is not a crime that involves an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm.
must assert the privilege unless the client waives it. In this case, the clients’ names are not protected by the
attorney-client privilege, so the attorney may reveal their names. The privilege covers only confidential
communications between a client and a lawyer. It does not cover clients’ identities unless disclosing their
identities will implicitly reveal their confidential communications, which is not the case here. Therefore, it is
irrelevant that the information is confidential under Rule 1.6(a) and that it is not subject to the exception under
Rule 1.6(b)(1) that allows the disclosure of confidences to prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily
harm.
(D) No, because the attorney has no way of knowing which of the two clients gave her the counterfeit bills.
must assert the privilege unless the client waives it. In this case, the clients’ names are not protected by the
attorney-client privilege, so the attorney may reveal their names. The privilege covers only confidential
Practice Exam 1
communications between a client and a lawyer. It does not cover clients’ identities unless disclosing their
identities will implicitly reveal their confidential communications, which is not the case here.
If, on the other hand, the attorney’s information in this case were privileged (which it isn’t), then the attorney
could not disclose it under the “crime-fraud” exception because the attorney does not know which client paid
with counterfeit bills and also does not know whether the client who did so was aware that the bills were
counterfeit. But because the information is not privileged, the crime-fraud exception is inapplicable.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 16
A corporation has applied to a bank for a $900,000 loan to be secured by a lien on the corporation’s inventory. The
inventory, consisting of small items, constantly turns over. The security documents are complex and if improperly drawn
they could result in an invalid lien. The bank has approved the loan on the condition that the corporation and the bank
jointly retain an attorney to prepare the necessary security instruments and that the corporation pay the attorney’s fees. Both
the corporation and the bank gave informed consent in writing to the attorney’s representation of both parties. This
arrangement is customary in the city in which the attorney’s law office and the bank are located. It is obvious to the
attorney that he can adequately represent the interests of both the corporation and the bank.
Is it proper for the attorney to prepare the security documents under these circumstances?
(A) Yes, because both the bank and the corporation have given their informed consent to the arrangement.
Correct. The attorney has a conflict of interest under Rule 1.7(a) arising out of the representation of two clients in
the same transaction—the bank, which is the lender, and the corporation, which is the borrower. But Rule 1.7(b)
allows the attorney to represent both clients with informed consent, confirmed in writing, because the attorney
reasonably believes that he can competently and diligently represent them both.
(B) Yes, because the arrangement is customary in the community.

Incorrect. The fact that the arrangement is customary in the community is irrelevant. The attorney has a conflict
of interest under Rule 1.7(a) arising out of the representation of two clients in the same transaction—the bank,
which is the lender, and the corporation, which is the borrower. However, the joint representation would be
permissible in this situation under Rule 1.7(b).
(C) No, because the attorney’s fees are being paid by the corporation, not the bank.
Incorrect. In a joint representation such as this one, there is no restriction against the payment of legal fees by
one of the two clients with informed consent, as required by Model Rule 1.8(f).
(D) No, because the corporation and the bank have differing interests.
Incorrect. Although the clients have differing interests, and there is therefore a conflict of interest under Rule
1.7(a), Rule 1.7(b) allows the attorney to represent both clients with informed consent, confirmed in writing,
because the attorney reasonably believes he can competently and diligently represent them both.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 17
An attorney represented a plaintiff in a civil suit against a defendant who was represented by other counsel. In the course of
developing the plaintiff’s case, the attorney discovered evidence that she reasonably believed showed that the defendant
had committed a crime. The attorney felt that the defendant’s crime should be reported to local prosecutorial authorities.
After full disclosure, the plaintiff consented to the attorney’s doing so. Without advising the defendant’s counsel, the
attorney informed the local prosecutor of her findings, but she sought no advantage in the civil suit from her actions. The
defendant was subsequently indicted, tried, and acquitted of the offense.
Was the attorney’s disclosure to prosecutorial authorities proper?
(A) Yes, because the attorney reasonably believed the defendant was guilty of a crime.
Correct. If a lawyer identifies criminal behavior on the part of an opposing party, upon consent of the client, the
lawyer may disclose such information to the prosecutor. Once the lawyer has the client’s consent, disclosure of
the information would be permissive and not mandatory.
(B) Yes, because the attorney was required to report knowledge of criminal conduct when that knowledge was obtained
through unprivileged sources.
Incorrect. The lawyer is not required to report an opposing party’s criminal activity to the prosecutor. Also, the
decision to report the defendant to the criminal authorities does not depend on whether the information
discovered is privileged or not.
(C) No, because the attorney did not advise the other counsel of her disclosure before making it.
Incorrect. There is no duty to inform the defendant’s lawyer before reporting the information.
(D) No, because the plaintiff’s civil suit against the defendant was still pending.
Incorrect. It was permissible to report even though the civil suit was pending because the attorney was not trying
to get an advantage in the civil proceeding by making a complaint to the prosecutor. Had she been seeking an
advantage, it might have been impermissible under the law and therefore under Rule 3.4.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 18
An attorney hired a recent law school graduate as an associate. For the first six months, the associate was assigned to draft
legal documents that the attorney carefully reviewed and revised before filing. However, shortly after the associate was
admitted to the bar, the attorney told the associate that he would be going on vacation the following week and was
assigning her the representation of the landlord in a housing case that was going to trial while he was away. The associate
had never conducted or observed a trial before and, because she had not previously worked on any housing cases, she was
unfamiliar with the relevant law and procedure. She did not believe that she would have enough time to learn everything
that she needed to know, but she was reluctant to decline the assignment. Before the trial began, she met with the landlord
and disclosed that this would be her first trial, but the landlord did not object. Although the associate prepared diligently,
the landlord lost the trial.
(A) Yes, because the attorney did not ensure that the associate was competent to conduct the trial on her own.
Correct. Under Model Rule 5.1, a newly admitted lawyer in a firm must have his or her work properly supervised
by a more experienced lawyer. Under Model Rule 1.1, a law firm owes a client a duty of competence, and when
the firm uses less experienced lawyers to perform client work the partners must supervise that work. In this case,
the associate, who had never conducted or observed a trial and had not worked on landlord-tenant cases before,
needed supervision. There was not enough time for the associate to become familiar with the relevant law and
procedure, nor did she have the experience to competently handle the case. The attorney did not take the proper
precautions to make sure that the lawyer was adequately prepared to carry out the assignment.
(B) Yes, because the landlord lost the trial.

Incorrect. The outcome of the trial is not relevant to whether the associate was properly supervised as required by
Model Rules 1.1 and 5.1.
(C) No, because the attorney could reasonably assume that, having been admitted to the bar, the associate was capable of
conducting the trial.
Incorrect. The associate’s admission to the bar did not relieve the attorney of the responsibility to properly
supervise and train her.
(D) No, because the landlord did not object to the associate’s representation.
Incorrect. The consent of the landlord to this representation would not mitigate the violation of Model Rules 1.1
and 5.1, which impose a responsibility to properly train and supervise less experienced attorneys.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 19
An attorney represented the plaintiff in an automobile accident case. Two weeks before the date set for trial, the attorney
discovered that there was an eyewitness to the accident. The attorney interviewed the witness. Her version of the accident
was contrary to that of the plaintiff and, if believed by the trier of fact, would establish that the plaintiff was at fault. The
witness told the attorney that she had not been interviewed by defense counsel.
The witness also told the attorney that she was uncomfortable with testifying and that she had been thinking about taking a
vacation to Europe the following week. The attorney told the witness that, since no one had subpoenaed her yet, she had no
obligation to appear. He told her that trials were very difficult for witnesses and suggested that she take the vacation so that
she would be unavailable to testify.
(A) Yes, because the attorney asked the witness to leave the jurisdiction.
Correct. Model Rule 3.4(f) prohibits a lawyer from asking a person other than a client to refrain from voluntarily
giving relevant information to another party unless the person is a relative or an employee or other agent of the
client.
(B) Yes, because the attorney did not subpoena the witness knowing she was an eyewitness.
Incorrect. A lawyer is under no obligation to subpoena a witness that the lawyer does not intend to call at trial.
(C) No, because the witness had not been subpoenaed by the defense.
Incorrect. Even though the witness had not been subpoenaed by the defense, Model Rule 3.4(f) prohibited the
attorney from asking the witness to refrain from voluntarily giving relevant information to another party.
(D) No, because the attorney did not offer the witness any inducement not to appear at the trial.
Incorrect. Although the attorney did not offer the witness any inducement not to appear at trial, Model Rule
3.4(f) prohibited the attorney from asking the witness to refrain from voluntarily giving relevant information to
another party.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 20
An attorney represented the plaintiff in a personal injury matter. The attorney had heard that the defendant in the matter
was anxious to settle the case and reasonably believed that the defendant’s lawyer had not informed the defendant about the
attorney’s recent offer of settlement. The attorney instructed her nonlawyer investigator to tell the defendant about the
settlement offer so that the attorney could be sure that the defendant’s lawyer did not force the case to trial merely to
increase the defendant’s lawyer’s fee.
(A) Yes, because the defendant was represented by counsel.

Correct. Model Rule 4.2 prohibits a lawyer from communicating about a matter with a person known to be
represented in the matter unless the person’s lawyer consents to the communication or the communication is
authorized by law. Under Rule 8.4(a), a lawyer may not violate the rules directly or through the acts of another.
Here, the attorney used a nonlawyer agent to violate the anticontact rule.
(B) Yes, because the attorney was assisting the investigator in the unauthorized practice of law.
Incorrect. The investigator merely relayed a communication from the attorney to the defendant and did not
thereby engage in the unauthorized practice of law.
(C) No, because the investigator is not a lawyer.

authorized by law. Such communication is impermissible regardless of whether it is done by the attorney or by
an agent of the attorney.
(D) No, because the attorney reasonably believed that the defendant’s lawyer was not keeping the defendant informed.
authorized by law. The defendant’s lawyer did not consent to the communication, and the fact that the
defendant’s lawyer was not relaying settlement offers did not otherwise justify the communication.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 21
An attorney was approached by a husband and a wife who had decided to dissolve their marriage. They had no children and
had worked out a tentative mutual property settlement. They did not want to retain separate lawyers because they hoped to
save money and believed that working with one attorney was more likely to result in a reasonably amicable dissolution.
Before coming to the attorney, they had drafted and each had signed a written agreement not to run up the costs and
increase the adversarial nature of the dissolution by retaining separate lawyers.
The attorney believed that he was able to provide competent and diligent representation to both the husband and the wife.
The attorney consulted with both independently concerning the implications of the common representation, including the
advantages and risks involved and the effect on their respective attorney-client privileges. The attorney reduced the
disclosures to writing in the form of a written retainer agreement and gave them each several days to consult independent
legal counsel if they so desired. The husband and the wife each chose not to consult independent counsel.
After six months of reasonably amicable negotiations, the wife announced that she had changed her mind about the
representation and had decided to retain her own lawyer. However, after the husband and the attorney insisted that she was
obligated to adhere to her prior written agreement, she reluctantly agreed to abide by it. The attorney was then able to draft
a property settlement agreement satisfactory to both parties.
Is the attorney subject to discipline for his conduct in the representation?
(A) Yes, because the attorney should not have undertaken to represent both the husband and the wife in the first place.
Incorrect. Under Rule 1.7, the initial representation was proper because it was reasonable for the attorney to
believe that he was able to provide competent and diligent representation to both the husband and the wife, and
the clients’ consent was informed and in writing.
(B) Yes, because the attorney insisted that the wife not hire another lawyer.
Correct. A client who has given consent to a potential conflict of interest may revoke the consent and may, like
any other client, terminate the lawyer’s representation at any time. It was improper for the attorney to insist that
the wife adhere to her prior agreement in derogation of her absolute right to terminate the joint representation.
(C) No, because both the husband and the wife initially consented to all aspects of the representation.
Incorrect. Even though the clients initially consented to the joint representation, each had an absolute right at any
time to revoke the consent and, like any other client, to terminate the attorney’s representation. It was improper
for the attorney to insist that the wife had given up that right.
(D) No, because the husband and the wife independently made the agreement that neither would retain separate counsel.
Incorrect. Even though the clients initially agreed between themselves to be jointly represented, each had an
absolute right at any time to revoke the consent and, like any other client, to terminate the attorney’s
representation. It was improper for the attorney to insist that the wife had given up that right.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 22
An attorney is a well-known tax lawyer and author. During congressional hearings on tax reform, the attorney testified to
her personal belief and expert opinion on the pending reform package. She failed to disclose in her testimony that she was
being compensated by a private client for her appearance. In her testimony, the attorney took the position favored by her
client, but the position was also one that the attorney believed was in the public interest.
Was it proper for the attorney to present this testimony without identifying her private client?
(A) Yes, because the attorney believed that the position she advocated was in the public interest.
Incorrect. The attorney’s conduct was improper because Model Rule 3.9 requires a lawyer representing a client
before a legislative body to disclose that the appearance is in a representative capacity.
(B) Yes, because Congress is interested in the content of the testimony and not who is paying the witness.
Incorrect. The congressional members at the hearing would be very interested in knowing whether a witness is
possibly biased in his or her testimony; therefore, Model Rule 3.9 requires a lawyer appearing in a representative
capacity to disclose that fact to the legislative body.
(C) No, because a lawyer may not accept a fee for trying to influence legislative action.
Incorrect. Lawyers frequently serve as paid lobbyists. This activity is permissible so long as the lawyer-lobbyist
complies with applicable rules, such as the requirement to disclose his or her representative capacity when
appearing before a legislative body.
(D) No, because a lawyer who appears in a legislative hearing should identify the capacity in which the lawyer appears.
Correct. Model Rule 3.9 requires a lawyer representing a client before a legislative body to disclose that the
appearance is in a representative capacity.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 23
An attorney closed her law practice when she became a state senator. A bank, one of the senator’s former private clients,
asked her as its senator to try to persuade a state agency to grant the bank a license to open a new branch bank. While the
bank’s request was pending before the agency, the senator wrote a letter on her legislative letterhead to the agency’s chair,
asserting that the branch would satisfy a local business need and urging that the bank’s application be granted. The senator
neither sought nor received any compensation from the bank for her efforts. Eventually the agency granted the bank’s
application, in part because of the senator’s efforts.
Is the senator subject to discipline?
(A) Yes, because the senator used her public position to attempt to influence the agency on behalf of the bank.
Incorrect. The senator was not assisting the bank as a client but as a constituent. Therefore, she did not misuse
her official position.
(B) Yes, because the agency granted the bank’s application in part due to the senator’s efforts.
Incorrect. The senator’s efforts as a legislator on behalf of a constituent were proper, since she was no longer
practicing law and was not seeking to assist the bank as a private client. Therefore, it does not matter that the
attorney influenced the agency.
(C) No, because the senator’s letter to the agency’s chair did not express an opinion about the law.
Incorrect. In acting in her legislative capacity, a legislator who is a lawyer may express opinions about the law.
(D) No, because the senator acted on behalf of the bank as a constituent and not as a client.
Correct. A practicing lawyer who is also a legislator may not use her official authority for the benefit of a private
client. But that is not what occurred here. As in this case, a legislator who is a lawyer but who is no longer
practicing law may assist a constituent in its dealings with a state agency.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 24
A county law prohibits stores from selling alcoholic beverages before noon on Sundays. Failure to comply is a
misdemeanor punishable by a fine of $150.
An attorney was hired by a client who owns several liquor stores. The client asked the attorney whether any store owners
had been prosecuted for violating the law and whether the fine could be imposed for every sale on a Sunday before noon or
only for every Sunday on which alcohol was sold before noon. The client also asked what he could do to minimize the risk
that he would be detected.
The attorney accurately told the client that the fine could only be imposed for each Sunday on which he sold alcoholic
beverages before noon, not for each transaction, and that no one had been prosecuted under the law as yet. She also told
him that she thought it would be improper to advise him about how to avoid detection. The client thanked the attorney for
the information and hung up. Several weeks later, the attorney learned that the client had begun to open his store for
business on Sundays at 9 a.m.
(A) Yes, because the attorney reasonably should have known that the information she gave the client would encourage him
to violate the law.
Incorrect. The Model Rules do not ask lawyers to speculate as to whether their advice about the scope and
enforcement of the law will ultimately be used to violate the law. The lawyer, by giving her opinion, did not
assist the client in violating the law.
(B) Yes, because the attorney did not discourage her client from breaking the law.
Incorrect. The lawyer told the client that she would not tell him how to avoid detection. She told him about the
law and its history. Discouraging a client from violating the law might have been the best practice, but failing to
discourage him is not cause for discipline.
(C) No, because the attorney merely gave the client her honest opinion about the consequences that were likely to result if
he violated the law.
Correct. Under Model Rule 1.2(d), a lawyer is permitted to delineate the law for a client but is not allowed to
counsel or assist a client in violation of the law.
(D) No, because the lawyer and the client could have discussed the best way to avoid detection under the criminal law.
Incorrect. Lawyers may not give clients information on how to best avoid compliance with the law.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 25
A judge has served on a trial court of general jurisdiction for almost three years. During that time, he was assigned criminal
cases almost exclusively. Several months ago, however, the judge was assigned an interesting case involving a
constitutional challenge to a statute recently passed by the state legislature. The statute permitted any local public school
district with an overcrowding problem to purchase educational services for its students in any other public or private school
within fifteen miles.
Although the briefs submitted by the parties were excellent, the judge was not confident that he had a good grasp of the
issues in the case. Accordingly, he took one of his more experienced colleagues on the trial court out to lunch and discussed
the case with her in great detail. The colleague was far more conservative than the judge, but he agreed with her and
eventually ruled in accord with her views. The case is now on appeal.
Is the judge subject to discipline?
(A) Yes, because the judge sought an ex parte communication on the merits of a case pending before him.
Incorrect. A conversation with another judge about a pending matter is not an ex parte communication.
(B) Yes, because the judge initiated a discussion with a colleague that may have influenced his judgment in the case.
Incorrect. A judge may consult with another judge in the court about a case as long as the judge to whom the
case is assigned does not abrogate his or her responsibilities.
(C) No, because the judge is permitted to obtain the advice of a disinterested expert on the law.
Incorrect. Under the 2007 CJC 2.9(A)(2), a judge may obtain written advice from a disinterested expert provided
that the judge gives advance notice to the parties about details of the consultation and the opportunity to object
and respond to the advice. This rule, however, is not applicable to a situation in which a judge consults with
another judge in the court.
(D) No, because the judge was permitted to consult about a pending case with another judge.
Correct. Judges are permitted to consult with other judges in the court about pending cases as long as they do not
abrogate their responsibilities to decide the matters and as long as they make reasonable efforts to avoid
receiving factual information not part of the record. 2007 CJC 2.9(A)(3).
Practice Exam 1
Question # 26
An attorney is a senior partner at a law firm in which there are 50 lawyers. The firm pays each of its lawyers a fixed annual
salary. In addition, at year’s end, each lawyer receives a bonus from the profits of the firm in the proportion that the annual
salary of each bears to the total of the fixed annual salaries of all lawyers.
The attorney plans to introduce a new management plan under which the firm’s nonlawyer office administrator would have
general charge of all business matters but would not participate in any decisions involving legal judgment. The
administrator would be paid a fixed annual salary and would be included as a participant in the firm’s bonus plan on the
same basis as the lawyers in the firm. This would usually yield a bonus of approximately one-fourth to one-third of the
administrator’s total annual compensation. The amount paid to the administrator will not exceed the compensation
commonly paid to law office administrators within the local legal community.
Is it proper for the attorney to institute such a plan?
(A) Yes, because the amount paid to the administrator does not exceed the compensation commonly paid to law office
administrators within the local legal community.
Incorrect. The plan is proper, but the reason why it is proper has nothing to do with the compensation paid to
other law office administrators in the community. This answer erroneously refers to Model Rule 1.5(a)’s
guidelines on reasonable fees for lawyers, which list as one factor fees paid to other similarly situated lawyers in
the community.
(B) Yes, because an employee of the firm may be compensated based on the profits of the firm.
Correct. The plan for part of the administrator’s compensation is based upon the net profits of the firm and this
arrangement is expressly permitted in Model Rule 5.4(a) as long as the nonlawyer is an employee. The other
aspects of the arrangement do not give the administrator an ownership interest in the firm nor any right to control
the legal work done in the law firm, thus avoiding any violation of the rule.
(C) No, because the administrator’s bonus is computed on the same basis as those of the lawyers in the firm.
Incorrect. The Model Rules do not address the basis on which net profits may be divided and distributed to
nonlawyer employees. That decision is for the firm.
(D) No, because the administrator’s compensation is derived from the legal fees of the firm’s lawyers.
Incorrect. Lawyers may not share legal fees with nonlawyers, but Model Rule 5.4(a) contains an exception for
the sharing of net profits with nonlawyer employees.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 27
An attorney represented a client in an action against the client’s former partner to recover damages for breach of contract.
During the representation, the client presented the attorney with incontrovertible proof that the former partner had
committed perjury in a prior action which was resolved in the partner’s favor. Neither the attorney nor the client was
involved in any way in the prior action. The attorney believes that it would be detrimental to the client’s best interests to
reveal the perjury because of the implication that might be drawn from the former close personal and business relationship
between the client and the former partner.
Would it be proper for the attorney to fail to disclose the perjury to the tribunal?
(A) No, because the information is unprivileged.

Incorrect. The lawyer’s duty to protect client information under Rule 1.6(a) covers more than just privileged
information. It covers all “information relating to the representation of a client.”
(B) No, because the attorney has knowledge that the former partner perpetrated a fraud on the tribunal.
Incorrect. A lawyer has a duty under Rule 3.3(b) to take remedial measures when the lawyer knows that a person
engaged in criminal conduct related to a proceeding in which the lawyer represents a client. But that duty does
not apply here, because the attorney did not represent the client in the proceeding in which the client’s former
partner committed perjury. Therefore, the duty to maintain confidentiality applies to this information.
(C) Yes, because neither the client nor the attorney was involved in the prior action.
Incorrect. A lawyer has a duty under Rule 3.3(b) to take remedial measures when the lawyer knows that a person
engaged in criminal conduct related to a proceeding in which the lawyer represents a client. But the duty
continues only to the end of that proceeding. Here, the proceeding in which the former partner committed perjury
is over. Therefore, even if the lawyer had represented the client in that proceeding, the lawyer would have no
duty at this time to disclose the former partner’s perjury.
(D) Yes, because the attorney believes that the disclosure would be detrimental to the client’s best interests.
Correct. The information about perjury committed by the client’s former partner is “information relating to the
representation” which generally may not be disclosed without client consent. Confidential information may be
disclosed under Rule 1.6(a) when “the disclosure is impliedly authorized in order to carry out the representation,”
but there would not be implied authorization where, as here, the disclosure would be likely to prejudice the
client, not advance the client’s objectives.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 28
An attorney represented ten plaintiffs in a case against a railroad in which the plaintiffs were injured when a train derailed.
The railroad offered the attorney a $500,000 lump sum settlement for the ten plaintiffs. The attorney allocated the $500,000
among the ten plaintiffs with the amount paid each plaintiff dependent on the nature and extent of that plaintiff’s injuries.
The attorney reasonably believed the division was fair to each plaintiff.
The railroad would not settle any of the claims unless all were settled. The attorney told each plaintiff the total amount the
railroad was prepared to pay, the amount that the individual would receive, and the basis on which that amount was
calculated. The attorney did not tell any plaintiff the amount to be received by any other plaintiff. The attorney believed
that if she revealed to each plaintiff the amount of each individual settlement, it might jeopardize the settlement.
Each of the plaintiffs agreed to his or her settlement amount and was satisfied with that amount.
Is the attorney subject to discipline for entering into this settlement?
(A) Yes, because the attorney was aiding the lawyer for the railroad in making a lump sum settlement.
Incorrect. Rule 1.8(g) allows a lawyer to participate in an aggregate settlement of civil claims, as in this case, as
long as the lawyer complies with the requirement of informed consent by all clients, which the attorney failed to
do here.
(B) Yes, because no individual plaintiff knew the amount to be received by any other plaintiff.
Correct. Because this is an aggregate settlement of the clients’ claims, Rule 1.8(g) requires the attorney to obtain
the clients’ informed consent, after disclosing “the existence and nature of all the claims” and “the participation
of each person in the settlement.” Comment [13] states that the necessary disclosure includes information about
“all the material terms of the settlement, including what the other clients will receive.”
(C) No, because disclosing all settlements to each plaintiff might have jeopardized the entire settlement.
Incorrect. Rule 1.8(g) and Comment [13] to the rule require disclosure of the material terms of the settlement
regardless of whether the settlement will thereby be jeopardized, because all of the clients are entitled to material
information regarding their decision on whether to accept the settlement offer, and each must give informed
consent.
(D) No, because the attorney reasonably believed that the division was fair and each plaintiff agreed to his or her
settlement and was satisfied with the amount.
Incorrect. Whether or not the lawyer regards the aggregate settlement offer as fair, Rule 1.8(g) requires a lawyer
to make full disclosure to the clients so that they can each make an informed decision as to whether to accept the
offer. According to Comment [13] to Rule 1.8, the attorney did not make the required disclosure because she did
not disclose “all the material terms of the settlement, including what the other clients will receive.”
Practice Exam 1
Question # 29
An attorney was recently admitted to practice and was hired as a new associate of a large law firm. The attorney was
working late one night when he received a telephone call from his cousin. The cousin said that he was calling from the
police station because he had just been arrested for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. He was permitted to
make only one phone call, and the attorney was the only one he knew. The attorney responded that he had no criminal law
experience and that his firm did not handle criminal cases. Nevertheless, the cousin pleaded with the attorney to come to
the police station and see what he could do to get him out on bail. The attorney replied that he would do what he could.
The attorney went to the police station and used what information he recalled from his criminal law and procedure courses
to attempt to get his cousin released on bail. However, as a result of his inexperience, the attorney was unable to secure his
cousin’s release that night. The next morning, the attorney found an experienced criminal lawyer for his cousin, who
obtained his release within one hour.
(A) Yes, because neither referral to another lawyer nor consultation with another lawyer was practical under the
circumstances.
Correct. Under Rule 1.1, a lawyer may give advice on an emergency basis when referral or consultation with
another lawyer is not possible. An emergency phone call from jail is one of those kinds of cases in which a
lawyer may give advice even though the lawyer does not know criminal law. But for any additional work, the
lawyer must become competent or find another lawyer to take on the matter, which the attorney did in this case.
(B) Yes, because the attorney was a close relative.

Incorrect. Nothing in the rules makes conduct proper because the services are performed for relatives. That is, the
work would have been acceptable even if the attorney was unrelated to the client since this was an emergency
situation.
(C) No, because the attorney had no special training or experience in criminal cases.
Incorrect. It is true that the attorney did not have experience in criminal law, but because this was an emergency
case, the attorney was permitted to give advice.
(D) No, because the attorney did not have the requisite level of competence to accept representation in the case.
Incorrect. The attorney did not take on the case, but only gave limited legal advice in an emergency situation,
which is permitted by the rules.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 30
An attorney represents a client in commercial litigation that is scheduled to go to trial in two months. Over the past several
weeks, the client has disagreed with almost every tactical decision that the attorney has made. Frustrated, the attorney
finally said to the client that if she didn’t like the way he was handling the lawsuit, perhaps she should get another lawyer.
The client was upset at the suggestion and accused the attorney of trying to get out of the case. Reasonably believing that
he could no longer work effectively with the client, the attorney sought the client’s permission to withdraw from the
representation, and the client reluctantly agreed. After giving the client sufficient notice to obtain replacement counsel, the
attorney requested the court’s permission to withdraw from the litigation, but the court denied the request.
May the attorney withdraw from the representation?
(A) Yes, because the client agreed, and the attorney gave the client sufficient notice to obtain replacement counsel.
Incorrect. In all court proceedings, the judge must consent to the withdrawal and substitution of counsel.
Sufficient notice and client consent are not enough for withdrawal if the court does not agree. Rule 1.16(c) states
that the lawyer must continue the case if ordered to do so by the court.
(B) Yes, because the client had made it unreasonably difficult for the attorney to carry out the representation effectively.
Incorrect. The client conduct is a reason for the lawyer to move for withdrawal, but the lawyer must get the
court’s permission before withdrawal would be proper. Rule 1.16(c) states that the lawyer must continue the case
if ordered to do so by the court.
(C) No, because the court denied the attorney’s request to withdraw.
Correct. Rule 1.16(c) states that the lawyer must continue the case if ordered to do so by the court.
(D) No, because the attorney’s withdrawal would cause material prejudice to the client, and the client’s agreement was not
voluntary.
Incorrect. There is no evidence that the client would be prejudiced by the withdrawal. Withdrawal is improper
because the court refused to grant permission to withdraw. Rule 1.16(c) states that the lawyer must continue the
case if ordered to do so by the court.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 31
An attorney is employed in the legal department of a public utility company and represents that company in litigation. The
company has been sued by a consumer group that has accused the company of various acts in violation of its charter.
Through its general counsel, the company has instructed the attorney not to negotiate a settlement but to go to trial under
any circumstances because a precedent needs to be established. The attorney believes the defense can be supported by a
good faith argument, but also believes the case should be settled if possible.
Must the attorney withdraw as counsel in this case?
(A) Yes, because the company is controlling the attorney’s judgment in refusing to settle the case.
Incorrect. Although the attorney had an obligation to use independent judgment in advising the client, Model
Rule 1.2(a) provides that a lawyer must abide by a client’s decision concerning the objectives of the
representation.
(B) Yes, because a lawyer should endeavor to avoid litigation.

Incorrect. Litigation is often necessary to vindicate a client’s rights under law, and, as a result, nothing in the text
or comments of the Model Rules suggests that lawyers should as a general matter endeavor to avoid litigation
that is not frivolous.
(C) No, because the company’s defense can be supported by a good faith argument.
Correct. Under Model Rule 3.1, it is not frivolous to begin a lawsuit or assert a defense if there is a good faith
argument that will support the prosecution or defense.
(D) No, because, as an employee, the attorney is bound by the instructions of the general counsel.
Incorrect. Even when an attorney is an employee of a company, the attorney is required to exercise independent
judgment and could not, for example, file a frivolous lawsuit on the company’s behalf. In prosecuting lawsuits
that are not frivolous and in defending lawsuits where there is a good faith argument for the defense, however,
the lawyer must abide by the client’s decision concerning the objectives of the representation regardless of
whether the lawyer is employed or retained.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 32
An attorney was retained by a woman to advise her in negotiating a separation agreement with her husband. The husband,
who was not a lawyer, had decided to act on his own behalf in the matter. The attorney never met or communicated with
the husband during the negotiations. After several months, the woman advised the attorney that the parties had reached
agreement and presented him with the terms. The attorney prepared a proposed agreement that contained all of the agreed-
upon terms. The attorney mailed the proposed agreement to the husband, with a cover letter stating:
“As you know, I represent your wife in this matter and I do not represent your interests. I enclose two copies of the
separation agreement that I have drafted in accordance with my client’s directions. Please read the agreement and, if it
meets with your approval, sign both copies before a notary and return them to me. I will then have your wife sign them and
will furnish you with a fully executed copy.”
(A) Yes, because the attorney did not suggest that the husband seek the advice of independent counsel before signing the
agreement.
Incorrect. Model Rule 4.3 applies to a lawyer’s dealings with an unrepresented person. It requires that the lawyer
not state or imply that the lawyer is disinterested and that the lawyer not give legal advice to the unrepresented
person. The attorney did neither here. Although the rule permits the lawyer to advise the unrepresented person to
confer with counsel, it does not require the lawyer to do so.
(B) Yes, because the attorney directly communicated with an unrepresented person.
Incorrect. Model Rule 4.3 expressly permits lawyers to contact unrepresented persons, so long as they follow
certain requirements in dealing with those persons.
(C) No, because the attorney acted only as a scrivener.

Incorrect. The attorney did not act as a scrivener or otherwise on behalf of the husband. As the attorney clearly
stated, the attorney was acting solely on behalf of the wife in this matter. Whether the attorney acted as drafter or
scrivener with respect to the proposed agreement is not relevant to the question of whether his contact with the
husband was proper. Model Rule 4.3 permits a lawyer to contact an unrepresented person so long as the lawyer
does not state or imply that the lawyer is disinterested. By clearly identifying the wife as his client, the attorney
complied with this rule.
(D) No, because the attorney’s letter did not imply that the attorney was disinterested and the attorney did not give legal
advice to the husband.
Correct. Model Rule 4.3 permits a lawyer to contact an unrepresented person so long as the lawyer does not state
or imply that the lawyer is disinterested. By clearly identifying the wife as his client, the attorney complied with
this rule.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 33
An attorney’s law firm regularly represented a large company in its international business transactions. The company
became involved in a contractual dispute with a foreign government. The company invoked a mandatory arbitration
procedure contained in the contract. Under the arbitration clause, each party was allowed to choose a partisan arbitrator and
the partisan arbitrators were to choose an additional arbitrator to sit on the panel. The company selected the attorney to be
on the arbitration panel. Neither the attorney nor his law firm had represented the company in connection with the contract
with the foreign government. The arbitration was completed, and the company was awarded the sum of $100,000. The
company then hired the attorney to enforce the award. The attorney obtained the consent of the other arbitrators before
accepting the representation. He was successful in enforcing the award.
(A) Yes, because the attorney should not have represented the company in a matter in which the attorney had been an
arbitrator.
Incorrect. Under Model Rule 1.12(d), an arbitrator selected as a partisan of a party in a multimember arbitration
is not prohibited from subsequently representing that party in the same matter.
(B) Yes, because the attorney should have declined the arbitration assignment in view of his law firm’s regular
representation of the company.
Incorrect. There is no rule that prohibits a party from choosing as a partisan arbitrator a member of the law firm
that regularly represents the company in matters other than the subject of the arbitration.
(C) No, because the attorney obtained the consent of the other arbitrators before accepting the representation.
Incorrect. Model Rule 1.12(d) does not require a lawyer who has served as a partisan arbitrator to obtain the
consent of the other arbitrators before representing one of the parties to the arbitration. Moreover, if the
representation was otherwise prohibited, as when a lawyer who served as a neutral arbitrator subsequently
represents one of the parties in the same matter, the consent of the arbitrators would not cure the conflict.
(D) No, because the attorney was appointed to the arbitration panel as a partisan arbitrator.
Correct. Although a lawyer who served as a neutral arbitrator would be prohibited from undertaking the
representation, Model Rule 1.12(d) expressly permits a lawyer selected as a partisan of a party in a multimember
arbitration panel to subsequently represent that party in the same matter.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 34
An attorney represented a client who was injured when the television antenna he was attempting to erect in his yard came
in contact with a power line. As part of its defense, the manufacturer of the antenna claimed that the antenna came with a
warning label advising against erecting the antenna near power lines. The client told the attorney that he had not seen a
warning label. The client’s wife told the attorney that she had kept the antenna and the box it came in and that she saw no
warning label anywhere.
When called by the attorney as witnesses, both the client and his wife testified that they had never seen a warning label.
After their testimony, but while the trial was still in progress, the attorney learned from the wife’s sister that there indeed
had been a warning label on the box, but that the wife had removed and destroyed it. When the attorney confronted the wife
with her sister’s statement, the wife admitted destroying the label but insisted that her husband knew nothing about it. The
attorney continued the trial, but made no reference to the absence of a warning label in his summation to the jury. Instead,
the attorney argued that the warning label, even if seen, was insufficient to advise his client of the serious consequences
that would ensue if the warning was not heeded. The jury found in favor of the manufacturer.
(A) Yes, because the attorney called the wife as a witness and she gave perjured testimony.
Incorrect. Model Rule 3.3(a)(3) prohibits a lawyer from knowingly offering evidence that the lawyer knows to be
false, but the attorney did not know that the wife’s testimony would be perjured when the attorney called her as a
witness.
(B) Yes, because the attorney failed to take reasonable remedial action after he realized that the wife had given perjured
testimony.
Correct. Model Rule 3.3(a)(3) requires that when a lawyer learns that a witness called by the lawyer has offered
material evidence that is false, the lawyer must take reasonable remedial measures. That duty continues to the
conclusion of the proceeding. Model Rule 3.3(c). Because the proceeding was not yet concluded when the
attorney learned that the wife’s testimony was false, the attorney had a duty to take reasonable remedial
measures. Such measures would include meeting with the client and informing him of the attorney’s obligation
of candor to the court and asking the client to correct the fraud. If the client refused and if the attorney could not
undo the prejudicial effect of the fraud, the attorney would need to disclose the fraud to the court.
(C) No, because the jury apparently disbelieved the wife’s testimony.
Incorrect. Model Rule 3.3(a)(3) requires the lawyer to take reasonable remedial measures when the lawyer learns
that the testimony was false, because the lawyer cannot know at that time the effect the false testimony will have
on the fact finder.
(D) No, because the attorney did not rely on the wife’s testimony once he discovered the perjury.
Incorrect. It is insufficient for the attorney to refuse to rely on the false testimony in summation. Model Rule
3.3(a)(3) requires the lawyer to take reasonable remedial measures, including, if needed, disclosure to the
tribunal.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 35
An attorney represented a respondent in proceedings instituted by a child protection services agency to establish the
paternity of a child and to recover past-due child support. The mother of the child had refused to file a complaint, had
refused to retain a lawyer, and in fact had asked that the agency not file any action whatsoever. However, state law
permitted the agency to commence paternity and support proceedings in its own name in such circumstances.
The attorney contacted the mother without the knowledge or consent of the agency or its lawyers. The attorney identified
himself to the mother as “an officer of the court” and told the mother that he was investigating the matter. Based upon what
she told him, the attorney prepared and the mother signed an affidavit truthfully stating that the respondent was not the
father of the child.
(A) Yes, because the attorney acted without the knowledge or consent of the agency or its lawyers.
Incorrect. Model Rule 4.2 prohibits a lawyer from communicating about the subject of the representation with a
person the lawyer knows to be represented by another lawyer in the matter unless that lawyer consents; however,
in this case, the mother was not represented by the agency or its lawyers or by any other lawyer.
(B) Yes, because the attorney implied that he was disinterested in the matter.
Correct. Model Rule 4.3, which governs the conduct of lawyers dealing with unrepresented persons, prohibits a
lawyer from stating or implying that the lawyer is disinterested in a matter in which the lawyer represents an
interested party. The mother was an unrepresented person in this case.
(C) No, because all of the attorney’s statements to the mother were true.
Incorrect. Although it may be true that all lawyers are “officers of the court” in some sense, in this context such a
statement clearly implied that the lawyer was disinterested in the outcome of the case, and such statements are
prohibited by Model Rule 4.3.
(D) No, because the attorney did not give the mother legal advice.
Incorrect. Model Rule 4.3 prohibits a lawyer from giving an unrepresented person legal advice, but it also
prohibits a lawyer from stating or implying that he or she is disinterested in a matter in which the lawyer
represents an interested party, which is what the attorney did here.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 36
A recently graduated attorney began a plaintiffs' personal injury practice, but was having a difficult time attracting clients.
The attorney hired an advertising agency to prepare a television commercial in which the attorney appeared to be arguing a
case before a jury. In the commercial, the jury brought back a large award for the attorney’s client. The voice-over stated
that results would vary depending upon particular legal and factual circumstances. The attorney’s only experience at the
time the commercial was filmed was in moot court. As a result of airing the commercial, the attorney received several
significant cases.
(A) Yes, because the commercial created an unjustified expectation about the results that could be achieved in court.
Incorrect. Model Rule 7.1 prohibits false or misleading statements in lawyer advertising. An advertisement may
truthfully report a lawyer’s achievement on behalf of a former client unless it would lead a reasonable person to
form an unjustified expectation that the same results could be obtained for other clients. The use of a prominent
disclaimer, such as the voice-over in the ad, avoids such an expectation.
(B) Yes, because the commercial implied that the attorney had successfully argued a case to a jury.
Correct. Although the advertisement does not expressly state that the attorney has successfully tried a case, the
communication would lead a reasonable person to believe that. As a result, the communication is misleading and
is prohibited by Model Rule 7.1.
(C) No, because commercial speech is protected under the First Amendment.
Incorrect. It is true that commercial speech is protected under the First Amendment, but the First Amendment
does not prohibit states from banning false or misleading communications in advertisements by professionals
such as lawyers. Model Rule 7.1 prohibits false or misleading statements in lawyer advertising.
(D) No, because the commercial contained an express disclaimer about the results a client could expect.
Incorrect. The voice-over disclaimer avoids unjustified expectations regarding the results a client could expect,
but it does not avoid the misleading implication that the attorney had successfully argued a case to a jury. Model
Rule 7.1 prohibits false or misleading statements in lawyer advertising.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 37
An attorney regularly appears before a trial court judge who is running for reelection in six months. Over the past year, the
attorney has noticed that the judge has become increasingly ill-tempered on the bench. Not only is the judge abrupt and
critical of lawyers appearing before him, he is also rude and abusive to litigants. On more than one occasion, the judge has
thrown his gavel across the courtroom in a fit of temper. The judge’s conduct on the bench is often the subject of discussion
whenever a group of lawyers meets. Some lawyers are automatically filing requests for judicial substitution whenever a
case in which they are to appear is assigned to the judge.
The attorney discussed the matter with her law partners, who rarely make court appearances. The attorney’s law partners
suggested that she, too, file a request for judicial substitution whenever one of her cases is assigned to the judge. In
addition, the attorney and her law partners discussed the possibility of reporting the judge to the appropriate disciplinary
authority but are concerned that this would alienate the other judges to whom their cases are assigned. The attorney has
reluctantly started filing for substitution of the judge in every one of her cases to which the judge is assigned, but she has
taken no further action.
(A) Yes, because the attorney failed to inform the appropriate authorities about the judge’s conduct.
Correct. Under Model Rule 8.3, a lawyer who has actual knowledge that a judge has committed a violation of the
rules of judicial conduct that raises a substantial question as to that person’s fitness for judicial office must
inform the appropriate authority. In this fact pattern, the judge has on more than one occasion thrown a gavel
across the courtroom and has been critical of lawyers and rude to litigants. Such behavior crosses the line into
conduct that raises a substantial question as to his ability to judge.
(B) Yes, because, by filing automatic requests for substitution of the judge, the attorney undermined public confidence in
the administration of justice.
Incorrect. Under Model Rule 8.3, a lawyer who has actual knowledge that a judge has committed a violation of
the rules of judicial conduct that raises a substantial question as to that person’s fitness for judicial office must
inform the appropriate authority. Filing requests for substitution of the judge does not excuse the duty to report,
but it really has nothing to do with public confidence in the judiciary. Failing to report the judge’s behavior does
affect public confidence.
(C) No, because the attorney has a duty to represent her clients zealously.
inform the appropriate authority. Zealous representation of the attorney’s clients does not relieve her of the duty
to report the judge.
(D) No, because the judge is running for reelection and may not be reelected.
inform the appropriate authority. Whether or not the judge will be reelected does not affect the attorney’s duty to
report this matter to the appropriate authority.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 38
A company’s president telephoned his city’s best-known employment attorney and asked her to represent the company in a
dispute that had just arisen with the company’s chief financial officer. The attorney, who had never previously represented
the company, agreed. At the president’s insistence, she immediately commenced the representation. A few days later,
during a meeting with the president, the attorney first revealed the amount of her customary hourly fee and then explained
that the company would also be responsible for reimbursing her expenses. The president responded that her fee was higher
than he had expected but that he would be happy for the company to pay it, given her excellent work to date. Although the
attorney intended to follow up with a confirming letter, she never did so. For several more months, she assisted the
company in resolving its employment dispute. Afterward, she sent the company a bill accurately reflecting her hourly fee
and expenses, which were reasonable.
(A) Yes, because she did not disclose the basis of her fee before commencing the representation.
Incorrect. Model Rule 1.5(b) says that the lawyer’s basis for the fee must be disclosed before commencing or
within a reasonable time after commencing a representation.
(B) Yes, because she did not confirm her fee agreement in writing.
Incorrect. Model Rule 1.5(b) states that a fee arrangement shall be communicated to the client, preferably in
writing, but written confirmation is not mandatory.
(C) No, because she disclosed the basis of her fee within a reasonable time after commencing the representation.
Correct. As required by the Model Rules, the lawyer disclosed the basis of the fee within a reasonable time after
commencing the representation.
(D) No, because she was not required to advise the client of her customary hourly fee, unless requested to do so.
Incorrect. Because she was taking on a new representation in this case, the lawyer was required by the Model
Rules to inform the client about the basis for her fee.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 39
Attorney Alpha, a sole practitioner, recently suffered a heart attack and was advised that she could not return to work for
six months. Alpha delivered all of her clients’ files to Attorney Beta, who is also a sole practitioner. Beta agreed to review
each client’s file promptly, take any action necessary to protect each client’s interests, and treat the information in the files
as confidential. Alpha then wrote her clients, advising each client that the client’s file had been delivered to Beta for review
and for any action necessary to protect the client’s interest, and that the client was free to select another lawyer.
Alpha knows that Beta is a competent attorney. Beta did not accept the file of any person whose interests were, or could be,
adverse to the interests of any of Beta’s own clients.
Was it proper for Alpha to deliver the files to Beta for review?
(A) Yes, because Alpha knows that Beta is competent to protect the clients’ interests.
Incorrect. Even if Beta is competent, Alpha needs a client’s consent to engage Beta in the representation and
disclose the client’s confidences to Beta. Rule 1.6(a) generally prohibits a lawyer from revealing information
relating to the representation of a client without client consent. The disclosure to Beta was not “impliedly
authorized in order to carry out the representation,” because a client would not anticipate that his or her lawyer,
who is a sole practitioner, would transfer the client’s matters to a different lawyer.
(B) Yes, because Beta agreed to treat the information in the files as confidential.
Incorrect. Even if Beta agrees to keep the client’s information confidential, the client’s consent is needed to
engage Beta and share the client’s confidences with Beta. Subject to exception, Rule 1.6(a) generally prohibits a
lawyer from revealing information relating to the representation of a client without client consent. No exception
applies here.
(C) Yes, because given her medical condition, Alpha’s delivery of the files was necessary to protect the clients’ interests.
Incorrect. If Alpha had first secured the clients’ consent it would have been permissible to deliver the files to
Beta. But absent client consent, the disclosure of clients’ confidences to Beta was prohibited by Rule 1.6(a),
since there was no applicable exception to the confidentiality duty expressed in that rule.
(D) No, because Alpha did not obtain the prior consent of each client whose file was delivered to Beta.
Correct. In general, Rule 1.6(a) prohibits a lawyer from revealing information relating to the representation of a
client without client consent. A lawyer practicing in a law firm is impliedly authorized to disclose client
confidences to other lawyers within the law firm, see Rule 1.6, cmt. [5], but not to lawyers outside the firm.
There is an exception when a lawyer seeks legal advice from another lawyer about how to comply with the ethics
rules, but that exception does not apply here. Therefore, the lawyer needed client consent.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 40
An attorney decided to obtain a master’s degree in taxation, but lacked the funds required for tuition and expenses. The
attorney consulted one of his clients, a wealthy banker, for advice about obtaining a loan. To the attorney’s surprise, the
client offered the attorney a personal loan of $10,000. The attorney told the client that he would prepare the required note
without charge.
Without further consultation with the client, the attorney prepared and signed a promissory note bearing interest at the
current bank rate. The note provided for repayment in the form of legal services to be rendered by the attorney to the client
without charge until the value of the attorney’s services equaled the principal and interest due. The note further provided
that if the client died before the note was fully repaid, any remaining principal and interest would be forgiven as a gift.
The attorney mailed the executed note to the client with a transmittal letter encouraging the client to look it over and call
with any questions. The client accepted the note and sent the attorney a personal check for $10,000, which the attorney
used to obtain his master’s degree. A month after the degree was awarded, the client was killed in a car accident. The
attorney had not rendered any legal services to the client from the date of the note’s execution to the date of the client’s
death. Thereafter, in an action brought by the client’s estate to recover on the note, the court ruled that the note was
discharged as a gift.
(A) Yes, because the client, without having been requested by the attorney to do so, voluntarily made the loan.
Incorrect. The lawyer failed to comply with the procedural requirements of Rule 1.8(a) regarding business
transactions with clients, and was required to do so even if the client initiated the transaction by offering to make
the loan.
(B) Yes, because the court ruled that the note had been discharged as a gift.
Incorrect. At the time of the transaction, the client was making a loan, not giving a gift, and therefore the lawyer
was obligated, but failed, to comply with the procedural requirements of Rule 1.8(a) regarding business
transactions with clients. Had this been a gift, not a loan, the lawyer’s conduct would have been improper under
Rule 1.8(c), because a lawyer may not prepare an instrument on behalf of a client that gives the lawyer a
substantial gift, unless the lawyer and client are relatives.
(C) No, because a lawyer may never accept a loan from a client.
Incorrect. A lawyer may accept a loan from a client as long as the lawyer complies with the requirements of Rule
1.8(a). In this case, the attorney violated Rule 1.8(a), which provides that a lawyer may not enter into a business
transaction with a client unless the transaction is fair and reasonable, and unless the lawyer complies with
procedural requirements, such as giving written advice about the desirability of seeking independent legal advice,
and obtaining informed consent.
(D) No, because the attorney did not comply with the requirements for entering into a business transaction with a client.
Correct. The attorney violated Rule 1.8(a), which provides that a lawyer may not enter into a business transaction
with a client unless the transaction is fair and reasonable, and unless the lawyer complies with procedural
requirements, such as giving written advice about the desirability of seeking independent legal advice, and
obtaining informed consent.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 41
A sole practitioner was appointed to represent a criminal defendant on appeal. A recently admitted lawyer who shared
office space with the sole practitioner agreed to write the brief if the sole practitioner would pay him one-half of the
statutory fee. The defendant agreed to the arrangement in writing, after full consultation. The recently admitted lawyer
entered an appearance as co-counsel for the defendant and, with the sole practitioner’s knowledge, applied for and received
several extensions of time to file the brief. Subsequently, the appellate court dismissed the appeal for failure to pursue the
appeal. A third lawyer was later appointed to represent the defendant, whose conviction was affirmed after the appeal was
reinstated.
Is the sole practitioner subject to discipline?
(A) Yes, because he neglected the defendant’s case.

Correct. A lawyer who is appointed to represent a criminal defendant must competently discharge his work or
associate with someone who will perform the work competently with the consent of the client. The lawyer
neglected the case because he referred the case to an inexperienced attorney and was aware that the attorney was
not competently representing the defendant.
(B) Yes, because he shared fees with the recently admitted lawyer.
Incorrect. The client consented to the arrangement with full information and in writing, which is allowed under
the rules.
(C) No, because the defendant agreed in writing to the co-counsel arrangement.
Incorrect. The defendant’s consent to the agreement did not relieve the sole practitioner of the responsibility of
making sure that the appeal was timely filed.
(D) No, because the affirmance by the appellate court indicated that the defendant’s appeal was without merit.
Incorrect. The end result in the court did not relieve the sole practitioner of his responsibility to make sure that
the first appeal was done properly.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 42
After both parties had completed the presentation of evidence and arguments, the judge took under advisement a case tried
without a jury. The case involved a difficult fact issue of causation and a difficult issue of law.
After the case was under advisement for several weeks, the plaintiff’s attorney heard rumors that the judge was having
difficulty determining the issue of factual causation and was uncertain about the applicable law. Immediately after hearing
these rumors, the attorney telephoned the judge, told her of the rumors he had heard, and asked the judge if she would like
to reopen the case for additional evidence and briefing from both parties. Thereafter the judge reopened the case for further
testimony and requested supplementary briefs from both parties.
Was it proper for the attorney to communicate with the judge?
(A) Yes, because both parties were given full opportunity to present their views on the issues in the case.
Incorrect. The communication was improper. Model Rule 3.5 prohibits a lawyer from communicating ex parte
with a judge unless authorized to do so by law or court order, neither of which occurred here.
(B) Yes, because the attorney did not make any suggestion as to how the judge should decide the matter.
Incorrect. The communication was improper. Model Rule 3.5 prohibits a lawyer from communicating ex parte
with a judge unless authorized to do so by law or court order, neither of which occurred here.
(C) No, because the attorney communicated with the judge on a pending matter without advising opposing counsel.
Correct. Ex parte communications with the judge are prohibited by Model Rule 3.5. The attorney should have
approached the judge jointly with opposing counsel or through a formal submission to the court with a copy to
opposing counsel.
(D) No, because the attorney caused the judge to reopen a case that had been taken under advisement.
Incorrect. The content of the attorney’s communication was unobjectionable. However, Model Rule 3.5 prohibits
a lawyer from communicating ex parte with a judge unless authorized to do so by law or court order, neither of
which occurred here. In this case, the lawyer participated in an unauthorized ex parte communication concerning
the subject of the litigation.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 43
An attorney represents the plaintiff in a defamation lawsuit. Both the plaintiff and the defendant are well-known public
figures, and the lawsuit has attracted much publicity. The attorney has been billing the plaintiff at an agreed-upon hourly
fee for his services. Recently the plaintiff suggested that, rather than paying hourly, she would like to assign the attorney
the media rights to a book and movie based on her lawsuit as full payment of services rendered from that point until the end
of the litigation. The attorney responded that he would consider it, but that the plaintiff should first seek independent advice
as to whether such an arrangement would be in her best interest. The attorney knew that, in the unlikely event that the
lawsuit was settled quickly, the media rights might be worth more than he would have earned on an hourly fee basis.
Is the attorney subject to discipline if he agrees to the plaintiff’s offer?
(A) Yes, because the attorney knew that, in the unlikely event that the lawsuit was settled quickly, the media rights might
be worth more than he would have earned on an hourly fee basis.
Incorrect. The possibility that the media rights may turn out to be worth more than the attorney’s hourly fee does
not make the agreement improper. The attorney would not be entering an agreement for an “unreasonable fee”
under Rule 1.5(a) because it was not likely that the media rights would in fact be worth more than his usual
hourly fee. The agreement is improper, however, under Rule 1.8(d) because, prior to the conclusion of a
representation, a lawyer may not make an agreement with the client giving the lawyer media rights to an account
based in substantial part on information relating to the representation.
(B) Yes, because the attorney has not concluded the representation of the plaintiff.
Correct. Under Rule 1.8(d), prior to the conclusion of a representation, a lawyer may not make an agreement
with the client giving the lawyer media rights to an account based in substantial part on information relating to
the representation.
(C) No, because the defamation lawsuit is a civil and not a criminal matter.
Incorrect. The agreement would violate Rule 1.8(d), which prohibits a lawyer, prior to the conclusion of a
representation, from acquiring media rights to the client’s account, which would be based in substantial part on
information relating to the representation. The rule applies in civil as well as criminal matters.
(D) No, because the attorney recommended that the plaintiff first seek independent advice before entering into the
arrangement.
Incorrect. Under Rule 1.8(d), prior to the conclusion of a representation, a lawyer may not make an agreement
with the client giving the lawyer media rights to an account based in substantial part on information relating to
the representation. Even if the client is advised to first obtain independent legal advice, this conduct is forbidden,
because it creates an unwaivable conflict while the representation is being conducted.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 44
An attorney represented a plaintiff in an action against a manufacturer of a drain cleaner. The plaintiff’s complaint alleged
that the manufacturer’s product exploded in use and caused her serious and permanent injuries. The jury agreed and
awarded the plaintiff $5,000,000 in actual damages and an additional $5,000,000 in punitive damages. The manufacturer
paid the judgment.
The attorney made this recovery the cornerstone of an aggressive television advertising campaign for his law practice. In
those ads, a voice-over discussed the $10,000,000 recovery obtained in the plaintiff’s case. The plaintiff praised the
attorney’s legal skills in an on-camera statement, saying that no one would work harder on a case than the attorney.
The plaintiff prepared her on-camera statement in response to the attorney’s request, but without any further involvement
by the attorney, and she believed it to be entirely true.
Is the attorney subject to discipline for using the television advertisement described above?
(A) Yes, because the advertisement is likely to create an unjustified expectation about the results the attorney will be able
to achieve and is therefore misleading.
Correct. Model Rule 7.1 prohibits false or misleading statements in lawyer advertising. The Comment to the
Rule notes that an advertisement truthfully reporting a lawyer’s achievement on behalf of a client may be
misleading if presented so as to lead a reasonable person to form an unjustified expectation that the same results
can be obtained for other clients in similar matters without reference to the specific factual and legal
circumstances of each client’s case. An express and prominent disclaimer would be necessary to avoid such
unjustified expectations here.
(B) Yes, because the attorney’s advertisement contains a client testimonial.

Incorrect. There is no per se ban on client testimonials in Model Rule 7.1 or any of the other advertising rules.
Such testimonials are prohibited only when they include false or misleading communications. Here, the
misleading communication is the voice-over discussion of the result in the plaintiff’s case, not the plaintiff’s own
statements.
(C) No, because the plaintiff prepared the entire statement without any involvement by the attorney.
Incorrect. The attorney is responsible for the entire content of the advertisement, regardless of the lack of the
attorney’s involvement in creating the ad or the testimonial.
(D) No, because the result obtained in the plaintiff’s case was reported accurately, and the plaintiff believed that
everything she said about the attorney was true.
Incorrect. Model Rule 7.1 prohibits false or misleading statements in lawyer advertising. It is true that the
advertisement does not contain any false statements; however, the report of the attorney’s achievement on the
plaintiff’s behalf is misleading because it could lead a reasonable person to form an unjustified expectation that
the same results could be achieved for other clients.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 45
A client telephoned an attorney who had previously represented him. The client described a problem on which he needed
advice and made an appointment for the following week to discuss the matter with the attorney. Prior to the appointment,
the attorney performed five hours of preliminary research on the client’s problem. At the end of the appointment the client
agreed that the attorney should pursue the matter and agreed to a fee of $100 per hour. The client then gave the attorney a
check for $5,000 to cover the five hours already worked and as an advance on additional fees and expenses.
The attorney gave the check to the office bookkeeper with directions to deposit the check into the client trust account and
immediately transfer $3,000 to the general office account to cover the five hours of research already conducted plus the 25
additional hours she would spend on the matter the following week. At that time, the attorney reasonably believed that she
would spend 25 additional hours on the case.
The bookkeeper followed these directions. The next week, the attorney worked diligently on the matter for 23 hours.
Reasonably believing that no significant work remained to be done on the matter, the attorney directed the bookkeeper to
transfer $200 from the general office account to the client trust account. The attorney then called the client and made an
appointment to discuss the status of the matter.
(A) Yes, because the attorney accepted legal fees in advance of performing the work.
Incorrect. An attorney may accept legal fees in advance of performing legal work, as long as the lawyer complies
with the requirement of Rule 1.15(c) that the advance fees be deposited in a client trust account until earned.
(B) Yes, because the attorney transferred funds for unearned fees to the general office account.
Correct. Rule 1.15(c) requires a lawyer to “deposit into a client trust account legal fees and expenses that have
been paid in advance, to be withdrawn by the lawyer only as fees are earned or expenses incurred.” Since the
attorney had earned only $500, for five hours of work, at the time of receiving the client’s check, only $500
should have been withdrawn from the trust account and placed in the general office account.
(C) No, because the attorney transferred the $200 owed to the client from the general office account to the client trust
account.
Incorrect. Under Rule 1.15(c), a lawyer may not hold fees paid in advance in the lawyer’s general office account
and later transfer unearned portions to the client trust account, as the attorney did here. Rather, the lawyer must
deposit the advance payment in the client trust account and withdraw the payment for fees as they are earned.
(D) No, because the attorney reasonably believed that she would spend 25 additional hours on the case.
Incorrect. Regardless of whether a lawyer expects to earn fees paid in advance, Rule 1.15(c) requires the lawyer
to deposit the advance payment in the client trust account until the fees are actually earned.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 46
An attorney agreed to represent a plaintiff in a personal injury matter. The original agreement between the attorney and the
plaintiff specified a 30% contingent fee, which was a reasonable fee for the type of cases the attorney handled. One year
into the litigation, the attorney noted that he was extremely busy and that many potential clients sought his services. As a
result, the attorney raised his standard fee to a 35% contingent fee, which was also a reasonable fee. The attorney’s
agreement with the plaintiff was silent on the possibility of a fee increase. He approached the plaintiff and proposed that
she agree to modify the contingent fee percentage from 30% to 35%. The attorney informed the plaintiff that if she did not
agree, the attorney would find her another experienced personal injury lawyer at the original fee, but that the attorney was
unwilling to continue the representation unless the fee was modified. The plaintiff reluctantly agreed to modify the fee
agreement as the attorney proposed.
Subsequently, the plaintiff’s case was settled. The plaintiff, however, refused to pay the attorney more than a 30%
contingent fee, and the attorney sued the plaintiff to recover under the modified fee agreement.
Is the attorney likely to prevail?
(A) Yes, because the attorney offered to find the plaintiff another experienced personal injury lawyer at the original rate.
Incorrect. All modifications of a fee agreement in an existing representation are subject to special scrutiny. The
lawyer, who has the burden of proof in any dispute about the fees, must justify the proposed modification by
showing special circumstances. Note that the only reasons given for the proposed fee increase were that the
lawyer was busy and was in demand, neither of them valid reasons for raising a fee. The fact that the lawyer
offered to find another lawyer who would charge the original fee does not excuse his behavior.
(B) Yes, because a contingent fee of 35% constituted a reasonable fee.

Incorrect. All modifications of a fee agreement in an existing representation are subject to special scrutiny. The
lawyer, who has the burden of proof in any dispute about the fees, must justify the proposed modification by
showing special circumstances, none of which are present here. The fact that the proposed fee was reasonable is
not relevant to whether the lawyer acted properly in insisting on the modification of the fee agreement.
(C) No, because the attorney did not suggest that the plaintiff seek the advice of independent counsel before accepting the
increased fee.
Incorrect. The Model Rules and the law of lawyering do not state a need to get independent counsel in such a
case. They do require, however, that the lawyer justify any proposed modification to the fee agreement by
showing special circumstances, which the lawyer is unable to do in this case. Independent counsel would not
have excused the lawyer’s behavior.
(D) No, because there were no special circumstances justifying the attorney’s insistence on a fee increase.
Correct. The Model Rules and the law of lawyering require that the lawyer justify any proposed modification to
the fee agreement by showing special circumstances. Special circumstances that would justify a modification to
the agreement would include, for example, a change in the nature of the case, a need to add more defendants, or
an unanticipated need to expend much more capital in advance to fund the case. No special circumstances were
present in this case.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 47
An attorney represented a man in a case set for a jury trial. After the list of potential jurors was made available, the attorney
hired a private investigator to interview the potential jurors and their family members concerning their relevant past
experiences related to the subject matter of the action. The investigator did not inform the jurors or their family members
that he was working on behalf of the attorney. The interviews were entirely voluntary and were not harassing.
The attorney did not provide the report of the interviews to opposing counsel. He used the report to make decisions
regarding jury selection.
(A) Yes, because the attorney did not provide the report of the interviews to opposing counsel.
Incorrect. Model Rule 3.5(b) prohibits a lawyer from communicating ex parte with prospective jurors during the
proceeding unless authorized to do so by law or court order. Providing a report of the interviews to opposing
counsel would not have cured the violation here.
(B) Yes, because the investigator, at the attorney’s direction, communicated with potential jurors prior to trial.
Correct. Model Rule 3.5(b) prohibits a lawyer from communicating ex parte with prospective jurors during the
proceeding unless authorized to do so by law or court order. The attorney could not use a private investigator to
do what the attorney could not do directly. Model Rule 8.4(a).
(C) Yes, because the investigator did not inform the jurors or their family members that he was working on behalf of the
attorney.
proceeding unless authorized to do so by law or court order. The attorney’s conduct in this case was clearly
prohibited by the rule, and informing the jurors or their family members that the contact was being made on
behalf of the attorney would not cure the violation.
(D) No, because the interviews were entirely voluntary and not harassing.
proceeding unless authorized to do so by law or court order. The attorney’s conduct in this case was clearly
prohibited by the rule even if the interviews were entirely voluntary and not harassing.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 48
Able, Baker, and Carter had been indicted for the armed robbery of a cashier at a grocery store. Together, Able and Baker
met with an attorney and asked her to represent them. The attorney then interviewed Able and Baker separately. Each told
the attorney that the robbery had been committed by Carter while Able and Baker sat in Carter's car outside the store. They
each said that Carter had said he needed some cigarettes and that they knew nothing of his plan to rob the cashier. The
attorney agreed to represent both Able and Baker. One week before the trial, Able told the attorney that he wanted to plea
bargain and that he was prepared to testify that Baker had loaned Carter the gun Carter used in the robbery. Able also said
that he and Baker had shared in the proceeds of the robbery with Carter.
What is the proper course of action for the attorney to take?
(A) Request court approval to withdraw as the attorney for both Able and Baker.
Correct. Attorney has a conflict of interest under Rule 1.7 and may not continue to represent both clients. If the
attorney negotiates a plea bargain for Able, she will be prejudicing Baker, whereas if she fails to negotiate the
plea bargain, she will be prejudicing Able. Under Rule 1.16(a)(1), the attorney must seek judicial permission to
withdraw from the representation to avoid violating Rule 1.7.
(B) Continue to represent Baker and, with Able’s consent and court approval, withdraw as Able’s lawyer.
Incorrect. If the attorney withdrew from representing Able, she would still have a conflict of interest under Rule
1.7 because of the duty to protect Able's confidences. There would be a risk that, in trying to avoid abusing
Able's confidences, the attorney would fail to represent Baker competently, especially when the time came to
cross-examine Able.
(C) Continue to represent Able and, with Baker’s consent and court approval, withdraw as Baker’s lawyer.
Incorrect. If the attorney withdrew from representing Baker but continued to represent Able, the attorney would
have a conflict of interest under Rule 1.9(a), which concerns representations adverse to a former client. By
continuing the representation of Able and negotiating an agreement whereby Able would testify against Baker,
the attorney would be representing Able adversely to Baker, now a former client, in the same matter in which the
attorney formerly represented Baker.
(D) Continue to represent Able and Baker, but not call Able as a witness.
Incorrect. The attorney has a conflict of interest under Rule 1.7 and may not continue to represent both clients. If
the attorney fails to negotiate the plea bargain for Able, she will be prejudicing Able. If Able does not enter into
the plea bargain, the attorney will still have a conflict because it may be in Able's best interest to call Able as a
witness, even though his testimony would prejudice Baker.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 49
A seller was engaged in negotiations to sell his interest in a large tract of land to a buyer who was unrepresented in the
transaction. Before the seller went out of town for a few days, he told the buyer to call his attorney if the buyer had any
questions about the property. The buyer called the seller’s attorney, asked certain questions about the size of the tract, and
expressed hesitations concerning the high asking price for the tract. The attorney responded that, based on his experience
handling real estate transactions in the neighborhood, the buyer would be getting a lot of property for the price. At the time
the attorney spoke to the buyer, the attorney knew that there was a defect in the title and that the buyer’s attempt to
purchase the seller’s interest in the tract would not result in the buyer’s acquisition of any interest in the property.
Relying on the attorney's assurance, the buyer agreed to make the purchase. Shortly after the sale closed, the buyer
discovered that his acquisition was worthless.
Is the attorney subject to civil liability to the buyer?
(A) Yes, because the attorney knowingly made false representations of fact to the buyer.
Correct. Normally, lawyers do not owe a duty to the opposing side of a transaction. But a lawyer may not make
intentional or negligent misrepresentations to a third person. In this case, the attorney made a misrepresentation
when he falsely told the buyer that he would be getting a lot of property for the price, because he knew that the
buyer’s attempt to purchase the seller’s interest would not result in the buyer’s acquisition of any interest in the
property.
(B) Yes, because the attorney implied that his opinion regarding the value of the property was a disinterested opinion.
Incorrect. Whether the attorney was or was not disinterested does not change the fact that the attorney made a
misrepresentation to the buyer.
(C) No, because the attorney’s statement that the buyer would be getting a lot of property for the money was a statement
of opinion regarding the value of the property.
Incorrect. The attorney’s statement could not be construed as an “opinion.” The attorney told the buyer that he
would be getting a lot of property for the price, knowing that the buyer’s investment would be compromised
because of the title issue.
(D) No, because the buyer was not a client of the attorney.
Incorrect. Normally, attorneys do not owe a duty to the opposing side of a transaction. In this case, however, the
attorney made a statement to the buyer that was patently false, exposing himself to civil liability.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 50
An attorney represents a famous politician in an action against a newspaper for libel. The case has attracted much publicity,
and a jury trial has been demanded. After one of the pretrial hearings, as the attorney left the courthouse, news reporters
interviewed her. In responding to the questions, the attorney truthfully stated that the judge upheld their right to subpoena
the reporter involved and question the reporter on her mental impressions when she prepared the article. The attorney
named the reporter involved.
Is the attorney subject to discipline for making this statement?
(A) Yes, because the attorney identified a prospective witness in the case.
Incorrect. Model Rule 3.6 prohibits making public communications that have a substantial likelihood of
materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding. There is no indication that the attorney’s communication in
this case would be materially prejudicial. In any event, Model Rule 3.6(b)(4) specifically permits statements
concerning information obtained in a public record.
(B) Yes, because prospective jurors might learn of the attorney’s remarks.
materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding. There is no indication that this communication would be
materially prejudicial, and Model Rule 3.6(b)(4) specifically permits statements concerning information obtained
in a public record.
(C) No, because the statement relates to a matter of public record.

Correct. Such statements are permitted by Model Rule 3.6(b)(4).
(D) No, because the trial has not commenced.

materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding. The prohibition in that rule against making prejudicial
extrajudicial statements is not limited to statements regarding trials that have commenced.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 51
An attorney regularly represents a certain client. When the client planned to leave on a world tour, she delivered to the
attorney sufficient money to pay her property taxes when they became due. The attorney placed the money in his clients’
trust account. When the tax payment date arrived, the attorney was in need of a temporary loan to close the purchase of a
new personal residence. Because the penalty for late payment of taxes was only 2 percent while the rate for a personal loan
was 6 percent, the attorney withdrew the client’s funds from the clients’ trust account to cover his personal check for the
closing. The attorney was confident that the client would not object. Ten days later, after the receipt of a large fee
previously earned, the attorney paid the client’s property taxes and the 2 percent penalty, fully satisfying the client’s tax
obligation. After the client returned, the attorney told her what he had done, and the client approved the attorney’s conduct.
(A) Yes, because the attorney failed to pay the client the 10 days of interest at the fair market rate.
Incorrect. Even if the lawyer had paid the higher rate of interest to the client, the lawyer’s personal use of the
client’s funds and his failure to carry out the client’s instructions would have been improper.
(B) Yes, because the attorney used the client’s funds for a personal purpose.
Correct. Client funds must be held for safekeeping in an account that is separate from the lawyer’s funds and
may be used only in accordance with the client’s instructions, not for the lawyer’s personal benefit. Further, the
attorney was required to use the funds for the client’s designated purpose, that is, for payment of the taxes when
they became due, and for no other purpose.
(C) No, because the client was not harmed and the attorney reasonably believed at the time he withdrew the money that
the client would not object.
Incorrect. Whether or not the client might be expected to acquiesce, a lawyer may not violate the client’s
instructions about how to use funds given to the lawyer for safekeeping, nor may the lawyer use those funds for
personal purposes.
(D) No, because when the attorney told the client what he had done, the client approved his conduct.
Incorrect. A client’s later approval of the action does not excuse a lawyer’s unethical use of client funds for
personal purposes.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 52
Alpha and Beta practiced law under the firm name of Alpha & Beta. When Beta died, Alpha did not change the firm name.
Thereafter, Alpha entered into an arrangement with another attorney, Gamma. Gamma pays Alpha a certain sum each
month for office space, for use of Alpha’s law library, and for secretarial services. Alpha and Gamma each have their own
clients, and neither participates in the representation of the other’s clients or shares in fees paid. On the entrance to the suite
of offices shared by Alpha and Gamma are the words “Law Firm of Alpha, Beta & Gamma.”
Is Alpha subject to discipline?
(A) Yes, because Beta was deceased when Alpha made the arrangement with Gamma.
Incorrect. Model Rule 7.5 and its Comment permit a lawyer to use the name of a deceased member of a firm
where there has been a continuing succession in the firm’s identity, regardless of whether the deceased partner
had given permission for the continuing use.
(B) Yes, because Gamma is not a partner of Alpha.

Correct. Model Rule 7.5(d) prohibits lawyers from stating or implying that they practice in a partnership or other
organization when that is not the fact. The sign at the entrance to the suite of offices represents to the public that
Alpha and Gamma practice together in a single law firm and is therefore prohibited by Rule 7.5(d), as well as by
Model Rule 7.1, which prohibits false or misleading communications about a lawyer’s practice.
(C) No, because Alpha and Beta were partners at the time of Beta’s death.
Incorrect. Alpha was indeed permitted to continue to use Beta’s name in his firm’s name under Model Rule 7.5,
but Rule 7.5(d) prohibits him from stating or implying that he and Gamma practice together in a single law firm.
(D) No, because Gamma is paying a share of the rent and office expenses.
Incorrect. Paying a share of the rent and other office expenses does not make Gamma a partner of Alpha, and
Model Rule 7.5(d) prohibits Alpha from stating or implying that he and Gamma practice together in a single law
firm.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 53
A trial court judge had instructed his court clerk and his secretary that one of them should be present in the office during
working hours to answer the telephone. One day, however, the secretary was out sick. The judge was in his office when his
court clerk was at lunch, and when the telephone rang, the judge answered it. The call was from a lawyer in a case
presently pending before the judge. The lawyer was calling to attempt to reschedule a pretrial conference set for the next
day because of a sudden family emergency. The lawyer had tried to call opposing counsel on the case, but she was not
answering his calls. The judge agreed to reschedule the pretrial conference for the following week. When the judge’s court
clerk returned from lunch, the judge instructed the clerk to contact opposing counsel to inform her of the telephone call and
the fact that the pretrial conference had been rescheduled.
Did the judge act properly?
(A) No, because the judge participated in an ex parte communication.

Incorrect. The judge did speak ex parte with one of the lawyers, but this specific type of communication is
expressly permitted by CJC 2.9(a)(1).
(B) No, because there was still time for the calling lawyer to notify opposing counsel in order to reach agreement on
rescheduling the pretrial conference.
Incorrect. The ex parte communication was either proper or it was not. A determination as to whether there was
time remaining to notify opposing counsel will not affect the propriety of the conduct.
(C) Yes, because the ex parte communication was for scheduling purposes only and did not deal with substantive matters
or issues.
Correct. Under CJC 2.9(a)(1), a judge or court official may speak ex parte with one of the litigants or a lawyer on
a matter of scheduling or any other administrative issue.
(D) Yes, because there was no one else in the office to take the lawyer’s call.
Incorrect. The availability of others to take the call does not affect the propriety of the ex parte communication.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 54
An attorney who had represented a client for many years prepared the client’s will and acted as one of the two subscribing
witnesses to its execution. The will gave 10 percent of the client’s estate to her housekeeper, 10 percent to her son and sole
heir, and the residue to charity. Upon the client’s death one year later, the executor named in the will asked the attorney to
represent him in probating the will and administering the estate. At that time the executor informed the attorney that the son
had notified him that he would contest the probate of the will on the grounds that the client lacked the required mental
capacity at the time the will was executed. The attorney believes that the client was fully competent at all times and will so
testify, if called as a witness. The other subscribing witness to the client’s will predeceased the client.
Is it proper for the attorney to represent the executor in the probate of the will?
(A) Yes, because the attorney is the sole surviving witness to the execution of the will.
Incorrect. The fact that the attorney is the sole surviving witness to the will’s execution means that the attorney is
likely to be a necessary witness regarding the client’s mental capacity when she executed the will. The attorney,
therefore, may not also represent the executor in connection with the will contest, since Rule 3.7(a) provides that
a lawyer may not serve as an advocate at a trial in which the lawyer is likely to be a necessary witness regarding
a contested issue.
(B) Yes, because the attorney’s testimony will support the validity of the will.
Incorrect. Under Rule 3.7(a), a lawyer may not represent a party at a trial in which the lawyer is likely to be a
necessary witness relating to a contested issue, even if the testimony supports the party’s position.
(C) No, because the attorney will be called to testify on a contested issue of fact.
Correct. Rule 3.7(a) states that a lawyer may not serve as an advocate at a trial in which the lawyer is likely to be
a necessary witness relating to a contested issue.
(D) No, because the attorney will be representing an interest adverse to the client’s heir at law.
Incorrect. The fact that the attorney would be representing a party (the executor) who is adverse to the deceased
client’s heir is irrelevant. But for the fact that the attorney is a likely witness, the representation would be proper.
However, Rule 3.7(a) provides that a lawyer may not serve as an advocate at a trial in which the lawyer is likely
to be a necessary witness relating to a contested issue. A lawyer may not represent a party who contests a will
prepared by the lawyer, but that lawyer may represent the executor of the client’s estate unless the lawyer is
likely to become a witness.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 55
An attorney entered into a written retainer agreement with a defendant in a criminal case. The defendant agreed in writing
to transfer title to her automobile to the attorney if the attorney successfully prevented her from going to prison. Later, the
charges against the defendant were dismissed.
Is the attorney subject to discipline for entering into this retainer agreement?
(A) Yes, because the attorney agreed to a fee contingent on the outcome of a criminal case.
Correct. Rule 1.5(d)(2) provides that a lawyer may not represent a defendant in a criminal case on a contingent
fee basis. Here, the client’s payment of a fee (title to an automobile) was contingent on a successful outcome in
the criminal case.
(B) Yes, because a lawyer may not acquire a proprietary interest in a client’s property.
Incorrect. Rule 1.8(i) provides that a lawyer may not obtain a proprietary interest in the cause of action or the
subject of the litigation the lawyer is conducting for a client, but the attorney has not done so in this case because
the automobile is not involved in the litigation. Rule 1.8(i) does not prohibit a lawyer in all cases from obtaining
a proprietary interest in a client’s property. The fee agreement, however, was impermissible under Rule 1.5(d)(2)
because the lawyer’s fee was contingent on the successful outcome in the criminal case.
(C) No, because the charges against the defendant were dismissed.
Incorrect. The fee agreement was impermissible under Rule 1.5(d)(2) because the lawyer’s fee was contingent on
the successful outcome of a criminal case. Therefore, even though the lawyer achieved success, he is subject to
discipline for entering into an impermissible fee agreement.
(D) No, because the retainer agreement was in writing.

Incorrect. Although it is true that a contingent fee agreement must be in writing, this agreement was improper for
a different reason. Rule 1.5(d)(2) forbids a contingent fee agreement in a criminal case.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 56
A corporation hired a law firm to handle all of its corporate work. The firm had not previously represented a corporation on
an ongoing basis, but decided that it wanted to attract additional corporate clients. Accordingly, the partners handling the
corporation’s work began a practice of giving to all lawyers in the firm, on a monthly basis, detailed descriptions of the
work they were doing for the corporation for the purpose of illustrating what the firm could do for corporate clients. One of
the partners mentioned this practice to the corporation’s management, and the corporation complained that its confidences
had been violated.
Was it proper for the partners to give detailed descriptions of the work being done for the corporation to other lawyers in
the firm?
(A) Yes, because, absent client instructions to the contrary, lawyers may discuss client information with other lawyers in
the firm.
Correct. Although the nature of the work done for clients of the firm is confidential under Rule 1.6 and generally
may not be disclosed to third parties without client consent, “[l]awyers in a firm may, in the course of the firm’s
practice, disclose to each other information relating to a client of the firm, unless the client has instructed that
particular information be confined to specified lawyers.” Rule 1.6, cmt. [5].
(B) Yes, because lawyers may discuss client information with other lawyers in the firm, regardless of client instructions to
the contrary, so long as the disclosure does not disadvantage the client.
Incorrect. If the client instructs that particular confidential information be disclosed only to particular lawyers in
the firm, the firm must abide by that instruction.
(C) No, because sharing the information increased the risk that it might be improperly disclosed to third parties outside the
firm.
Incorrect. To facilitate a law firm’s practice, its lawyers may share client confidential information with each
other, even though doing so may increase the risk that the information will be disclosed to third parties outside
the firm, because clients generally understand that this is done and implicitly consent to it. Law firms take other
measures to minimize the risk that the information will be disseminated to third parties. Therefore, except when
the client instructs otherwise or there are special reasons to limit disclosures within the firm, client information
may be shared, as in this case, among the firm’s lawyers for legitimate business purposes.
(D) No, because lawyers may not disclose client information, even to other firm lawyers, unless the disclosure is in
furtherance of the representation.
Incorrect. Disclosures of client information may be made within a law firm to carry out the representation, but
that is not the only circumstance in which disclosures may be made within the firm. In general, they may also be
made for the purpose of facilitating the law firm’s practice, such as for billing purposes or for the education of
young lawyers or, as in this case, to familiarize the firm’s lawyers with the nature of each other’s practice.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 57
A judge has recently resigned from the state trial court bench. When she was a judge, she supervised activity in cases
pending before another judge while he was on vacation. In one pending case, she entered an administrative order changing
the courtroom in which a particular case was to be tried. After trial and appeal, the case was remanded for a new trial. The
plaintiff in that case decided to change lawyers and has asked the recently resigned judge to try the case.
Will the judge be subject to discipline if she tries this case on behalf of the plaintiff?
(A) Yes, because the judge acted officially as a judge with respect to an aspect of the case.
Incorrect. Although the judge acted officially in the lawsuit before resigning from the bench, she was not
restricted by Rule 1.12(a) because she did not participate “substantially” in the matter when she entered an
administrative order changing the courtroom. Comment [1] to this Rule provides that “the fact that a former
judge exercised administrative responsibility in a court does not prevent the former judge from acting as a lawyer
in a matter where the judge had previously exercised remote or incidental administrative responsibility that did
not affect the merits.”
(B) Yes, because the judge would try the case before a judge of the court on which she previously sat.
Incorrect. No rule prohibits a former judge from appearing on behalf of a party before a judge of a court on
which she previously sat.
(C) No, because the judge did not act as a judge with respect to a substantial matter in or the merits of the case.
Correct. Under Rule 1.12(a), the former judge may represent the plaintiff because she did not participate
“substantially” in the matter while she was an acting judge. She merely entered an incidental administrative order
unrelated to the merits of the lawsuit.
(D) No, because any information that the judge learned about the case while acting as a judge was a matter of public
record.
Incorrect. The fact that information learned by the former judge in her administrative capacity is a matter of
public record would not be enough in itself to allow the former judge to represent a party in a matter in which she
had previously participated as a judge. If the judge’s personal participation had been substantial, which it was not
in this case, Rule 1.12(a) would forbid her later representation of the plaintiff.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 58
An attorney agreed to represent a client in a lawsuit. The attorney and the client executed the attorney’s preprinted retainer
form that provides, in part:
“The client agrees to pay promptly the attorney’s fee for services. In addition, the client and the attorney agree to release
each other from any and all liability arising from the representation. The client agrees that the attorney need not return the
client’s file prior to receiving the client’s executed release. Upon full payment, the attorney will return the file to the
client.”
Although the attorney recommended that the client consult independent counsel before signing the retainer agreement, the
client chose not to do so. The attorney reasonably believes that his fee is fair and that the quality of his work will be
competent.
Is the attorney’s retainer agreement with the client proper?
(A) Yes, because the attorney furnished consideration by agreeing to return the client’s file.
Incorrect. Under Rule 1.8(h), a lawyer may not limit his liability prospectively unless the client is independently
represented in making such an agreement. Whether there is consideration for the agreement is not relevant.
(B) Yes, because the attorney reasonably believes that his fee is fair and that the quality of his work will be competent.
represented in making such an agreement. The reasonableness of the proposed fee and the quality of the work are
not relevant to the propriety of the agreement.
(C) No, because the attorney is attempting to limit his liability for malpractice.
Correct. Under Rule 1.8(h), a lawyer may not limit his liability prospectively unless the client is independently
represented in making such an agreement.
(D) No, because the attorney uses a preprinted form for all retainers.
represented in making such an agreement. The form of the agreement is not relevant to whether the agreement is
proper.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 59
A client retained an attorney to appeal his criminal conviction and to seek bail pending appeal. The agreed-upon fee for the
appearance on the bail hearing was $100 per hour. The attorney received $1,600 from the client, of which $600 was a
deposit to secure the attorney’s fee and $1,000 was for bail costs in the event that bail was obtained. The attorney
maintained two office bank accounts: a fee account, in which all fees collected from clients were deposited and from which
all office expenses were paid, and a clients’ trust account. The attorney deposited the $1,600 in the clients’ trust account the
week before the bail hearing. She expended six hours of her time preparing for and appearing at the hearing. The effort to
obtain bail was unsuccessful. Dissatisfied, the client immediately demanded return of the $1,600.
What should the attorney do with the $1,600?
(A) Transfer the $1,600 to the fee account.

Incorrect. When legal fees are paid in advance, they must be kept in the clients’ trust account until earned. When
the representation ends, the lawyer must return the unearned portion (here, $1,000) to the client. The lawyer may
withdraw fees as earned except when, as in this case, they are disputed, in which case they must be kept in the
clients' trust account until the dispute is resolved. Rule 1.15(e).
(B) Transfer the $600 to the fee account and leave $1,000 in the clients’ trust account until the attorney’s fee for the final
appeal is determined.
Incorrect. Both steps are wrong. The $600, which represents the amount in dispute, must be kept in the clients’
trust account until the dispute is resolved. The remaining $1,000, which represents unearned fees, belongs to the
client, and must therefore be returned to the client. Rule 1.15(e).
(C) Transfer $600 to the fee account and send the client a $1,000 check on the clients’ trust account.
Incorrect. The lawyer is right to disburse $1,000 from the clients’ trust account to the client, since that amount
represents unearned fees and therefore undisputedly belongs to the client. Rule 1.15(e). But the $600 that is in
dispute must be kept in the clients’ trust account until the dispute is resolved.
(D) Send the client a $1,000 check and leave $600 in the clients’ trust account until the matter is resolved with the client.
Correct. Rule 1.15(e) requires that when the lawyer has a dispute with a client over funds in the lawyer’s
possession, the lawyer must deliver to the client the funds that undisputedly belong to the client and hold the
remainder in the clients’ trust account until the dispute is resolved. Therefore, the attorney is required to hold in
the clients’ trust account the amount of disputed legal fees ($600) and return the remaining $1,000 to the client.
Practice Exam 1
Question # 60
An attorney and a restaurant owner entered into a reciprocal referral arrangement. The attorney agreed to prominently
display ads for the restaurant in her office, and to mention the restaurant to all of her clients who requested a
recommendation of a nearby place to eat. In return, the owner agreed to prominently display ads for the attorney’s firm in
the restaurant and to recommend the attorney to any of his customers who indicated a need for the services provided by the
attorney. The reciprocal referral agreement was not exclusive, and the clients and customers would be informed of the
existence and nature of the agreement.
Is the attorney subject to discipline for entering into this agreement?
(A) Yes, because she asked the owner to place ads for the firm in the restaurant.
Incorrect. The Model Rules do not prohibit a lawyer from asking others to post advertisements concerning the
lawyer’s services.
(B) Yes, because the agreement provided something of value to the restaurant owner in return for recommending the
attorney's services.
Correct. Model Rule 7.2(b) prohibits a lawyer from giving anything of value to a person for recommending the
lawyer’s services. Subsection (4) of that rule provides for an exception for reciprocal referral agreements with
other lawyers or with nonlawyer professionals. Because the restaurant owner is not a professional, however, this
exception does not apply.
(C) No, because she did not pay the restaurant owner for the referrals.
Incorrect. A reciprocal referral agreement constitutes an agreement to give something of value in return for
recommending the lawyer’s services, and any such agreement is prohibited by Model Rule 7.2(b) unless the
agreement is with another lawyer or a nonlawyer professional. The attorney's promise to display the restaurant
ads and to mention the restaurant to clients seeking a recommendation is something of value.
(D) No, because the agreement is not exclusive, and the clients and customers will be informed of the existence and nature
of the agreement.
Incorrect. If the reciprocal referral agreement had been with a lawyer or a nonlawyer professional, these facts
would have made the agreement permissible under Model Rule 7.2(b)(4). That exception, however, does not
apply to the restaurant owner, who is not a professional.

Mpre Ope 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mpre Ope 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mpre Ope 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

National Conference of Bar Examiners

Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination - Online

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

Is it proper for the attorney to accept this limited representation?

What is the proper action for the attorney to take?

Is the attorney subject to civil liability?

Is the attorney subject to discipline if he continues to represent the client?

(A) Yes, because the client is engaging in continuing illegal conduct.

Was the attorney’s conduct proper?

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

Is the attorney subject to discipline for the announcement?

(C) No, because the information in the announcement was true.

Were the attorney’s remarks proper?

Is the judge’s proposed practice proper?

(C) No, because the practice may result in unnecessary appointments.

Is the attorney subject to discipline for the foregoing?

(C) No, because no charge is made for the attorney’s advice.

(D) No, because the attorney is a member of the bar.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

(A) Yes, because negotiation of a counterfeit bill is a criminal act.

(B) Yes, because the arrangement is customary in the community.

Was the attorney’s disclosure to prosecutorial authorities proper?

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

(B) Yes, because the landlord lost the trial.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

(A) Yes, because the defendant was represented by counsel.

(C) No, because the investigator is not a lawyer.

Is the attorney subject to discipline for his conduct in the representation?

Is the senator subject to discipline?

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

Is the judge subject to discipline?

Is it proper for the attorney to institute such a plan?

(A) No, because the information is unprivileged.

Is the attorney subject to discipline for entering into this settlement?

Was the attorney’s conduct proper?

(B) Yes, because the attorney was a close relative.

May the attorney withdraw from the representation?

Must the attorney withdraw as counsel in this case?

(B) Yes, because a lawyer should endeavor to avoid litigation.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

(C) No, because the attorney acted only as a scrivener.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

Was the attorney’s conduct proper?

Is the sole practitioner subject to discipline?

(A) Yes, because he neglected the defendant’s case.

Was it proper for the attorney to communicate with the judge?

Is the attorney subject to discipline if he agrees to the plaintiff’s offer?

(B) Yes, because the attorney’s advertisement contains a client testimonial.

Is the attorney subject to discipline?

Is the attorney likely to prevail?

(B) Yes, because a contingent fee of 35% constituted a reasonable fee.