VIII. Different Roles Of The Lawyer

Under MR 1.16(b), withdrawal is permitted if: (1) withdrawal can be accomplished without material adverse effect on the interests of the client, (2) the client fails substantially to fulfill an obligation to the lawyer regarding the lawyer's services (e.g. payment of fees), and has been given reasonable warning that the lawyer will withdraw unless the obligation is fulfilled, (3) the representation will result in an unreasonable financial burden on the lawyer, or has been rendered unreasonably difficult by the client, or (4) other good cause for withdrawal exists. Even if there is good cause to terminate a representation, the lawyer may have to continue representing a client if ordered to do so by a court [MR 1.16(c)]. The court's approval or notice will likely be required if the lawyer is representing the client in pending litigation.

Here, Attorney represents Client in a pending contract suit. Though, non–payment of bills may be good cause to withdraw, Attorney may need to give notice to Client that Attorney will obtain an order from the court to withdraw.

Advertising is permitted as long as the communication is not misleading and in accordance with MR 7.1 [MR 7.2]. MR 7.1 permits a lawyer to use any form of public communication about the lawyer's services that is not false or misleading. A lawyer may advertise through written, recorded, or electronic communication, including public media [MR 7.2(a)]. All ads must include the name and office address of at least one attorney or law firm [MR 7.2(c)].

Here, Attorney may advertise through the newspaper, a form of public media. The facts also state that the information in I, II, and III is true. I is proper because it provides Attorney's name and is not false or misleading. II and III are proper because the statements are not false or misleading.

"In the course of a representation, a lawyer must not communicate about the subject of the representation with a person, whether or not a party to the proceeding, the lawyer knows is represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the lawyer: (1) has consent of the other lawyer, or (2) is authorized to do so by law [MR 4.2]. The prohibition on communications with a represented person only applies in circumstances where the lawyer knows the person is represented [MR 4.2, cmt. [8]]. MR 4.2 applies even though the represented person initiates or consents to communication. A lawyer must immediately terminate communication with a person if, after commencing communication, the lawyer learns the person is one with whom communication is not permitted by MR 4.2 [MR 4.2, cmt. [3]].

Here, Alpha knows Plaintiff is represented by a lawyer because Alpha has presented settlement offers to Plaintiff's lawyer Beta. Alpha is prohibited from communicating with Plaintiff on the litigation, unless there is consent from Beta or Alpha is authorized by law to do so. Therefore, even though Plaintiff initiated the conversation, Alpha must immediately terminate communication.
"

"Advertising is permitted as long as the communication is not misleading and in accordance with MR 7.1 [MR 7.2]. MR 7.1 permits a lawyer to use any form of public communication to advertise the lawyer's services as long as the advertisement is not false or misleading. A lawyer may advertise through written, recorded, or electronic communication, including public media [MR 7.2(a)]. All ads must include the name and office address of at least one attorney or law firm [MR 7.2(c)].

Here, Alpha and Beta may advertise through the radio, a form of public media. Answer choice C states, "if all the statements in the radio broadcast are true." This means none of the statements are false or misleading. The advertisement also provides the name and office address of at least one attorney or law firm. As such, Alpha and Beta would not be subject to discipline for the commercial if all the statements in the radio broadcast are true.
"

"Under MR 1.5(e), a fee can be divided between lawyers who are not in the same firm if, the: (1) division is in proportion to the services performed by each lawyer, (2) client agrees to the arrangement in writing, and (3) total fee is reasonable.

Here, two lawyers, Alpha and Beta, of different law firms, arranged to divide fees, with Client?s written consent. If the total fee is reasonable and the division of fee between Alpha and Beta is in proportion to actual work done by each, Alpha and Beta are not subject to discipline.
"

"Generally, a lawyer cannot reveal information relating to the representation of a client, including information protected by the attorney–client privilege under applicable law [MR 1.6(a)]. A lawyer who has knowledge of a violation of the Rules that raises a question as to any lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer must inform the appropriate professional authority [MR 8.3(a)]. A report is not required where it would involve disclosure of confidential information otherwise protected by MR 1.6 [MR 8.3, cmt. [2]].

Here, Alpha discovered the misconduct by Beta from Client's files, information relating to the representation of a client. Alpha does not need to report Beta's violation of the Rules, unless Client agrees. Since Client told Alpha "But don?t say anything about it?," Client does not agree.
"

"Partners and supervising attorneys must make reasonable efforts to establish internal policies and procedures to provide reasonable assurance that all attorneys in their employ comply with ethical rules [MR 5.1, cmt. [2]]. The precise measures required to fulfill these obligations depend on the structure and the work of the firm, but should include procedures designed to detect and resolve conflicts of interest, identify dates by which actions must be taken in pending matters so deadlines are not missed, account for client funds and property, and ensure inexperienced lawyers are properly supervised. Supervising attorneys are personally responsible for subordinates' ethical violations if they order or ratify the subordinates' work. A subordinate lawyer must follow the Rules even when acting under the directions of another person [MR 5.2]. An employer is vicariously liable for tortuous acts committed by its employee if the acts occur within the scope of employment. To be within the scope of employment, the conduct need not be actually authorized. A competent lawyer may act incompetently in a client representation, and be subject to civil liability for malpractice.

I is incorrect because there are no Rules requiring a law firm to supervise a lawyer. The Rules require the managing lawyers, individual partners, or direct supervising lawyers to supervise Associate.

II is correct because the Rules relating to a lawyer who directly supervises, or is a law firm partner or managing lawyer, requires the lawyer to make reasonable efforts to assure the subordinate lawyer adheres to the Rules [MR 5.1(b)].

III is correct because Associate's own ethical duties remain [MR 5.1, cmt. [8], MR 5.2].

IV is correct because the law firm, as Associate's employer, is vicariously liable for Client's loss. Associate is personally liable for Client's loss because Associate incompetently failed to comply with a notice requirement.
"

"pon receiving funds or other property in which a client or third person has interest, the lawyer must promptly notify the client or third person [MR 1.15(d)]. A lawyer must promptly deliver to the client or third person any funds or other property the client or third person is entitled to receive, and upon request by the client or third person, must promptly render a full accounting regarding such property [MR 1.15(d)]. In general, a lawyer must hold funds and property of clients or third persons in a client trust account, separate from the lawyer?s own property [MR 1.15(a)]. Complete records of all account funds and property in a client trust account must be kept by the lawyer for five years after representation. The lawyer may withdraw from the client trust account only fees earned or expenses incurred [MR 1.15(c)].


I is proper because no part of the $10,000 belongs to Attorney. Upon receiving $10,000 belonging to Client, Attorney must promptly notify and deliver these funds to Plaintiff.


II is not proper because Attorney must not commingle funds belonging to Client by depositing the funds in Attorney?s personal bank account.


III is also proper because Attorney deposits the $10,000 in a Clients? Trust Account, separate from Attorney?s own property, and forwards the funds drawn on the account to Plaintiff."

"A judge or judicial candidate may not personally solicit or accept campaign contributions other than through a campaign committee as authorized by CJC 4.4. A judicial candidate may not personally solicit campaign contributions, except as expressly authorized, and may not personally accept campaign contributions [CJC 4.4, cmt. [1]].

As such, Alpha must give any contributions to Beta?s campaign committee.
"

"A lawyer must act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client [MR 1.3]. Under MR 1.3, comments 2–4, a lawyer should especially attend to: (1) controlling workload, (2) avoiding unreasonable delay and procrastination, (3) filing within the statute of limitations, and (4) carrying representation through to completion and ensuring clients know when representation ends. Under MR 1.4(a), in communicating with clients, lawyers must keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the matter, and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information. Competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and preparation necessary for the representation [MR 1.1].

Here, Alpha put off talking to the bus company's lawyer, and did not communicate with Passenger on the status of the case. After ten months passed and the statute of limitations risked running, Passenger had to find another attorney, Beta, to file the suit.
"

"A lawyer must make a reasonable effort to expedite litigation consistent with a client's interests [MR 3.2].

As such, Alpha may proceed with a default judgment if Defendant does file a responsive pleading in a timely fashion.
"

"Under CJC 4.1(A), a judge or judicial candidate may not knowingly or with reckless disregard for the truth, make a false or misleading statement.

Here, Attorney made an inquiry into Judge's reprimand so there was no reckless disregard for the truth. Attorney reasonably relied on the director's information, and did not knowingly, or with reckless disregard for the truth, made a false or misleading statement.
"

"Under MR 8.4(d), it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to state or imply an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official or to achieve results by means that violate the Rules or other law. A judge must uphold and promote the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary [CJC Canon 1]. A judge or judicial candidate will be responsible for acting at all times in a manner consistent with the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary [CJC 4.2].

Here, by stating "I make certain that I give the campaign committee of every candidate for elective judicial office more money than any other lawyer gives?Judges know who helped them get elected," Attorney implies an ability to improperly influence the decisions of judges since judges or judicial candidates are not allowed to be influenced by campaign contributions in the administration of justice.
"

"Under CJC 2.9(A)(2), a judge may obtain the written advice of a disinterested expert on the law applicable to a proceeding before the judge, if the judge gives advance notice to the parties of the person to be consulted and the subject matter of the advice to be solicited, and affords the parties a reasonable opportunity to object and respond to the notice and to the advice received.

If Attorney has no interest in the case, Attorney is a disinterested expert. Judge may not consult Attorney unless Judge gives advance notice to the parties of Attorney and subject matter of the advice, and affords the parties reasonable opportunity to object and respond to the notice and the advice received.
"

"Ex parte communications with the judge are prohibited by MR 3.5. An ex parte communication is a communication that concerns the merits of a case, and occurs outside the presence and without the consent of the other parties to the litigation or their representatives. A lawyer must not communicate orally on the merits with the judicial officer before whom a matter is pending without giving adequate notice to the adversary. Generally, a written communication to a judicial officer is not ex parte if a copy of the communication is timely sent to opposing parties or their counsels [Restatement of the Law Governing Lawyers §113, cmt. [c]].

In this case, however, Attorney improperly communicated with Judge orally by telephone outside of the presence, and without the consent, of the adversary. Attorney should have approached the judge jointly with opposing counsel or through a formal submission of a written communication to the court with a copy sent to opposing counsel.
"

"Law–related services are services that might reasonably be performed in conjunction with and, in substance, are related to the provision of legal services and not prohibited as the unauthorized practice of law when provided by a non–lawyer [MR 5.7(b)]. Law–related services include providing title insurance, financial planning, accounting, trust services, real estate counseling, legislative lobbying, economic analysis, social work, psychological counseling, tax preparation, and patent, medical, or environmental consulting [MR 5.7, cmt. [9]]. A lawyer may not assist another person in the unauthorized practice of law [MR 5.5, cmt. [1]].

Trustco may not provide legal services to its customers through a trust officer. Trustco is not authorized to practice law. The trust officer, a non–lawyer, may provide trust services, a law–related service, without Attorney being subject to discipline, but the services here relate to wills. Answering questions on wills is not a law–related service. By preparing the necessary documents for Trustco, Attorney facilitates Trustco in the unauthorized practice of law, though Attorney has no direct contact with customers.
"

"A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter may not thereafter represent another person in the same or a substantially related matter in which that person's interests are materially adverse to the interests of the former client unless the former client consents in writing after consultation [MR 1.9(a)].

Husband and Wife are former clients of Attorney. Wife?s litigation relates to the same agreement Attorney drafted for Husband and Wife. Wife's interests are adverse to the interests of Husband. As such, Attorney may not represent Wife, unless Husband consents in writing after consultation.
"

To protect the integrity of the judiciary, a lawyer is specifically prohibited from making a statement s/he knows to be false, or with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity, concerning the qualifications or integrity of a judge, adjudicative officer, public legal officer, or candidate for appointment to judicial or legal office [MR 8.2(a)]. A lawyer may not make a statement the lawyer knows to be false or with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity concerning the qualifications or integrity of a judge, adjudicatory officer or public legal officer, or of a candidate for election or appointment to judicial office [MR 8.2]. A lawyer's assessment of judges and judicial candidates is relied on in evaluating such persons' professional or personal fitness for judicial or legal office. A false statement or opinion that is not candid can unfairly undermine public confidence in the administration of justice [MR 8.2, cmt. [1]]. Under MR 8.4, it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. A judge or judicial candidate may not personally solicit or accept campaign contributions other than through a campaign committee as authorized under CJC 4.4.

I is proper because the activities are not prejudicial to the administration of justice.

II is proper because soliciting funds for Beta?s campaign is not prejudicial to the administration of justice. Beta may accept contributions through a campaign committee.

III is proper because Alpha may publicly oppose Delta's candidacy as long as Alpha does not make any statement Alpha knows to be false or with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity concerning the qualifications or integrity of Delta.

"Advertising is permitted as long as the communication is not misleading and in accordance with MR 7.1 [MR 7.2]. MR 7.1 permits a lawyer to use any form of public communication about the lawyer's services that is not false or misleading. A statement is misleading if it contains a material misrepresentation of fact or law [MR 7.1]. A lawyer may advertise through written, recorded, or electronic communication, including public media [MR 7.2(a)]. All ads must include the name and office address of at least one attorney or law firm [MR 7.2(c)]. An unsubstantiated comparison of a lawyer's services or fees with the services or fees of other lawyers may be misleading if presented with specificity to lead a reasonable person to conclude the comparison can be substantiated [MR 7.1, cmt. [3]].

Here, the ad contained Attorney?s name in compliance with MR 7.2(c). Attorney could properly advertise on television according to MR 7.2(a). The statement by the actor on fees did not compare Attorney's fees with those of other lawyers. It was also not a statement of fact, but rather opinion.
"

"The client has the ultimate authority to determine the purposes or objectives to be served by the representation. The objectives may include whether to enter a plea in a criminal case, after consulting with the lawyer [MR 1.2(a)]. The lawyer ordinarily has the right to determine the technical and legal tactical means by which the client?s objectives will be pursued, but has the obligation to consult with the client concerning those means [MR 1.2, cmt. [2]]. A lawyer who has knowledge of a violation of the Rules that raises a question as to any lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer must inform the appropriate professional authority [MR 8.3(a)].

Here, if Attorney refused to plea bargain because of personal motives, it would raise a question as to Attorney's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer. As such, if Prosecutor has knowledge that Attorney's refusal to plea bargain was due to personal motives, Prosecutor must report it to the disciplinary authority under MR 8.3(a).
"

"If a lawyer knows a client intends to testify falsely or wants the lawyer to introduce false evidence, the lawyer should seek to persuade the client that the evidence should not be offered [MR 3.3, cmt. [6]]. If the lawyer's statements are ineffective, and the lawyer continues to represent the client, the lawyer must refuse to offer the false evidence. If only a portion of the a client's testimony will be false, the lawyer may call the client to testify but may not elicit or otherwise permit the client to present the testimony the lawyer knows is false [MR 3.3, cmt. [6]]. A lawyer's knowledge that evidence is false can be inferred from the circumstances [MR 3.3, cmt. [8]]. Although a lawyer should resolve doubts about the veracity of testimony or other evidence in favor of a client, the lawyer cannot ignore an obvious falsehood [MR 3.3, cmt. [8]]. A lawyer may not knowingly offer evidence the lawyer knows to be false [MR 3.3(a)].

Here, Attorney knowingly used false testimony because Attorney knew Driver, if called as a witness, would give his assumed name and when Attorney called Driver as a witness, Driver gave his assumed name, not his true name.
"

"A lawyer may pay a witness? reasonably incurred expenses, reasonable compensation to a witness for loss of time attending or testifying in a case, or a reasonable fee for the professional services of an expert witness [MR 3.4, cmt. [3]].

I is proper because it relates to reasonably incurred expenses.

II is proper because it relates to Wit?s reasonable compensation for loss of time attending or testifying at the trial.

III is not proper because Wit may not receive a fee contingent on the outcome of the litigation or testimony Wit will give.
"

"A judge may not accept any gifts, loans, bequests, benefits, or other things of value, except a judge may accept a gift incident to a public testimonial [CJC 3.13].

Here, the portrait is incident to a public testimonial dinner so it is okay for the Judge to accept the gift of the portrait.
"

MR 3.7(a) states 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.

"Under MR 1.8(h)(1), an attorney may not settle a pending or potential malpractice claim with a client without advising the client in writing to seek independent legal counsel and giving the client time to do so.

Here, Attorney's conduct was proper if Attorney if Attorney advised Buyer in writing that Buyer should seek independent representation before entering into the settlement agreement.
"

"The lawyer ordinarily has the right to determine the technical and legal tactical means by which the objectives of the client will be pursued, but the lawyer has the obligation to consult with the client concerning the means [MR 1.2, cmt. [2]]. A lawyer is not bound to press for every advantage that might be realized for a client and has discretion regarding the means by which a matter should be pursued [MR 1.3, cmt. [1]]. A lawyer's duty to act with reasonable promptness does not preclude the lawyer from agreeing to a reasonable request for a postponement that will not prejudice the client [MR 1.3, cmt. [3]].

Here, Alpha may grant the extension out of professional courtesy as long as it does not prejudice Plaintiff's rights. Alpha does not need to insist on everything technically as instructed by Plaintiff because Alpha has discretion on the means to accomplish Plaintiff's objectives.
"

"A judge or judicial candidate may not personally solicit or accept campaign contributions other than through a campaign committee as authorized by CJC 4.4.

As such, Attorney may contribute $10,000 to Judge's reelection campaign through a campaign committee.
"

"A lawyer must conform to the same obligations of candor as to both law and fact imposed by MR 3.3(a), the obligation to not unlawfully obstruct access, destroy, conceal, or falsify evidence imposed by MR 3.4(c), and the Rules designed to secure the impartiality and decorum of the tribunal imposed by MR 3.5 [MR 3.9]. Under MR 8.4, it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to violate or attempt to violate the Rules, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through acts of another [MR 8.4(a)]. A lawyer does not violate MR 8.4 if the lawyer refuses to comply with a legal obligation, including the Rules, in the good–faith belief no valid obligation exists, even if the lawyer is proven wrong in a challenge to the law or Rule [MR 8.4, cmt. [4]]. An attorney may be liable for negligence, but not everything that causes harm is negligence. An attorney is not liable for "mere errors in judgment" if the judgment was well–informed and reasonably made.

Here, Attorney did not knowingly violate the Rules or assist Witness in violating the law. Attorney reasonably believed Witness had a legal right to refuse to answer the questions. Even if it turned out Attorney was wrong, Attorney may be subject to legal malpractice, but not discipline.
"

"Under MR 1.7, a lawyer must not represent a client if the representation is directly adverse to another client or materially limited by the responsibilities to another client, a former client, a third party, or by the lawyer's own interests, unless (1) the lawyer reasonably believes she will be able to provide competent and diligent representation to each affected client, (2) the representation is not prohibited by law, (3) the representation does not involve the assertion of a claim by one client against another client represented by the same lawyer, and (4) each client gives informed consent in writing.

As such, Alpha may not represent Neighbor because there is a conflict of interest. The representation of Neighbor involves an assertion of a claim by Neighbor against Builder, and Alpha does not have consent from Neighbor or Builder.
"

"Lawyers in the United States are generally free to refuse service to any person for any reason. MR 1.18 details duties to prospective clients.

In this case, Attorney talked to Baker, a prospective client, declined the representation, gave Baker another lawyer?s name, and urged him to contact that lawyer on a timely basis. Attorney did not owe Baker any other duty.
"

"MR 7.1 prohibits false or misleading communications about a lawyer?s practice. MR 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 prohibited by MR 7.5(d) and MR 7.1.
"

A former government lawyer can join a firm that has clients with direct conflicts with the government agency, and about which the attorney possesses protected information [MR 1.11(a)]. The lawyer is prohibited from representing a client in connection with a matter in which the lawyer has personally and substantially participated as a public officer or employee [MR 1.11(a)].

Attorney worked for ECC for ten years, and for two years personally and substantially participated in the preparation, trial, and appeal of the Deftco case.

If the lawyer is not competent to handle the representation, she may associate with competent counsel. Under MR 1.5(e), a fee can be divided between lawyers who are not in the same firm if, the: (1) division is in proportion to the services performed by each lawyer, (2) client agrees to the arrangement in writing, and (3) total fee is reasonable.

Here, two lawyers, Alpha and Beta, of different law firms, arranged to divide fees, without Plaintiff?s written consent.

"MR 3.6 prohibits making public communications that have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding. MR 3.6(b)(4) specifically permits statements concerning information obtained in a public record.

In this case, there is no indication that Attorney?s communication would be materially prejudicial to the adjudicative proceeding. Furthermore, Attorney?s communication may be obtained in public records at the courthouse and MR 3.6(b) (4) specifically permits such statements.
"

A former government lawyer can join a firm that has clients with direct conflicts with the government agency, and about which the attorney possesses protected information [MR 1.11(a)]. The lawyer is prohibited from representing a client in connection with a matter in which the lawyer has personally and substantially participated as a public officer or employee [MR 1.11(a)]. Other lawyers in the former government lawyer?s new firm may handle matters the former government lawyer participated in while in public service (1) if the former government lawyer is effectively screened from participation in the matter, (2) if the former government lawyer is not apportioned any part of the fee, and (3) written notice is promptly given to the government agency to enable it to ascertain compliance with MR 1.11.

As such, Alpha is not disqualified from representing Deft because Alpha took no part in the investigation and had no knowledge of the facts other than those disclosed in the press.

Under MR 3.4, a lawyer cannot during trial, allude to an irrelevant matter or one that is unsupported by admissible evidence, assert personal knowledge of facts in issue other than when testifying as a witness or state a personal opinion as to the justness of a cause, the witness' credibility, a civil litigant's liability, or a defendant's guilt or innocence.

Here, Prosecutor stated a personal opinion on Wit's credibility: "?I don?t believe Wit was telling the truth, and I don?t think you believe him either."

A lawyer's duty to act with reasonable promptness does not preclude the lawyer from agreeing to a reasonable request for a postponement that will not prejudice the client [MR 1.3, cmt. [3]]. The lawyer ordinarily has the right to determine the technical and legal tactical means by which the objectives of the client representation will be pursued, but she has the obligation to consult with the client concerning those means [MR 1.2, cmt. [2]].

Here, Attorney has discretion to agree to the December trial date because the decision relates to a technical and legal tactic. Client also informed Attorney of availability in December. As such, as long as Client is not prejudiced by the delay, Attorney does not need Client?s consent.

Under MR 1.16(a)(1), an attorney must seek judicial permission to withdraw from the representation to avoid violating MR 1.7.

In this case, Attorney has a conflict of interest under MR 1.7 and may not continue to represent both clients. If Attorney negotiates a plea bargain for Able, Attorney will be prejudicing Baker, whereas if Attorney fails to negotiate the plea bargain, she will be prejudicing Able.

A judge may obtain the advice of a disinterested expert on the law applicable to the proceeding before the judge if the judge gives notice to the parties of the person consulted and the subject matter of the advice solicited, and affords the parties a reasonable opportunity to object or respond to the advice received [CJC 2.9(A)(2)].

In this case, before relying on Attorney's letter, Judge did not notify the parties of the person consulted or the subject matter of the advice solicited nor did Judge provide the parties with an opportunity to respond. As such, it was improper for the Judge to consider Attorney's letter.

"Regardless of the means used to make a lawyer's services known, any statements about services should be truthful [MR 7.1, cmt. [1]]. Furthermore, when developments occur during representation that render an earlier estimate of fees substantially inaccurate, such as changed circumstances, or other good cause, a revised estimate should be provided to the client.

Here, Attorney advertised a $600 fee, and charged more than what was advertised without providing the client with a revised estimate. As such, Attorney is subject to discipline.
"

"A lawyer may not form a partnership or other business entity with a non-lawyer if any of the business' activities consist of the practice of law [MR 5.4(b)], or practice with, or in the form of a professional corporation or association authorized to practice law for a profit, if a non–lawyer owns an interest therein [MR 5.4(d)], or a non–lawyer has the right to direct or control the professional judgment of a lawyer.

Here, the proposed partnership would deliver legal services, so Attorney would be subject to discipline if he enters into this partnership with Acton, a non–lawyer.
"

In general, MR 1.6(a) provides "[a] lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent." No exception to the confidentiality rule allows or requires Attorney to disclose this information.

"Fundamental skills necessary for competence that even newly admitted attorneys should have include the ability to analyze precedent, evaluate evidence, draft legal documents, and identify legal issues and problems [MR 1.1, cmt. 2]]. Partners and supervising attorneys must make reasonable efforts to ensure inexperienced lawyers are properly supervised [MR 5.1, cmt. [2].

Here, Alpha left Beta to proceed with the securities matter alone, without supervision. As a newly admitted attorney, Beta may have fundamental skills necessary for competence, but Beta had no training or prior experience in securities law. Therefore, Alpha's conduct was not proper in this matter.
"

"A lawyer must not represent a client if the representation is directly adverse to another client or materially limited by the responsibilities to another client, a former client, a third party, or by the lawyer's own interests, unless (1) the lawyer reasonably believes she will be able to provide competent and diligent representation to each affected client, (2) the representation is not prohibited by law, (3) the representation does not involve the assertion of a claim by one client against another client represented by the same lawyer, and (4) each client gives informed consent in writing [MR 1.7].

Here, Attorney has a conflict of interest under MR 1.7(a) arising out of the representation of two clients in the same transaction—Bank, the lender, and Corp, the borrower. MR 1.7(b) allows Attorney to represent both clients with informed consent, confirmed in writing, because Attorney reasonably believes he can competently and diligently represent both.
"

"Advertising is permitted as long as the communication is not misleading and in accordance with MR 7.1 [MR 7.2]. MR 7.1 permits a lawyer to use any form of public communication about the lawyer's services that is not false or misleading. A lawyer may advertise through written, recorded, or electronic communication, including public media [MR 7.2(a)]. All ads must include the name and office address of at least one attorney or law firm [MR 7.2(c)].

Here, Attorney may advertise through the newspaper, a form of public media. The statement includes Attorney's name and address. Therefore, as long as the statement is not false or misleading (i.e. Attorney provides the services described for the fee stated), Attorney is not subject to discipline.
"

"MR 4.2 prohibits a lawyer from communicating about a matter with a person known to be represented in the matter unless (1) the person's lawyer consents to the communication, or (2) the communication is authorized by law. A lawyer may not make a communication prohibited by MR 4.2 through acts of another.

In this case, Attorney knows Defendant is represented by a lawyer because Defendant's lawyer filed and served an answer. As such, Attorney may not communicate directly with Defendant about the defamation case or use another person, such as Inv, to communicate with Defendant unless one of the exceptions applied.
"

"Under MR 7.2(b), a lawyer shall not give anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer's services except that a lawyer may (1) pay the reasonable costs of advertisements or communications permitted by MR 7.2, (2) pay the usual charges of a legal service plan or a not–for–profit or qualified lawyer referral service. A qualified lawyer referral service is a lawyer referral service that has been approved by an appropriate regulatory authority (3) pay for a law practice in accordance with Rule 1.17; and (4) refer clients to another lawyer or a non–lawyer professional pursuant to an agreement not otherwise prohibited under the Rules that provides for the other person to refer clients or customers to the lawyer, if (a) the reciprocal referral agreement is not exclusive, and (b) the client is informed of the existence and nature of the agreement.

In this case, Attorney enters into a referral agreement with Broker, a non–lawyer. The facts are not clear on Attorney compensating Broker, but under MR 7.2(b) Attorney may not give anything of value for the recommendations from Broker. However, recommending to Broker any client of Attorney who wishes to buy or sell real estate is something of value so Attorney would be subject to discipline for entering into this agreement with Broker.
"

"A judge should not allow family, social, political, financial, or other interests or relationships influence judicial conduct or judgment [CJC 2.4(B)]. A judge should not abuse the prestige of her office to advance the personal or economic interests of the judge or others, or allow others to do so [CJC 1.3]. A judge should keep herself informed of personal and fiduciary economic interests, and should make a reasonable effort to inform herself of the personal economic interests of a spouse or domestic partner and minor children residing in her household [CJC 2.11(B)]. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety because she must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny [CJC 1.2, cmt. [2]]. Under CJC 2.11(A), a judge must disqualify herself in a proceeding in which impartiality may reasonably be questioned, including where, the judge: (1) has personal knowledge of the disputed facts in the controversy, or (2) served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy, or was associated with a lawyer who participated substantially as a lawyer in the matter during such association.

Here, Judge is disqualified from ruling on the requests pursuant to CJC 2.11. Judge was a partner in Law Firm. As a partner with the firm, Judge likely had personal knowledge on the pending attorney's fees matter, or associated with a lawyer who participated substantially. Ruling on the requests may create an appearance of impropriety under CJC 1.2 even though Judge was paid a cash settlement and her ruling would not affect her personally.
"

"In general, a lawyer must hold funds and property of clients or third parties separate from the lawyer's own property [MR 1.15(a)]. When two or more persons (one of whom may be the lawyer) claim interest in the client's property, the lawyer must keep it separate until the dispute is resolved. However, the lawyer must promptly distribute all portions of the property not in dispute [MR 1.5(e)].

I is proper because if the total settlement is $60,000, the total owed to Client is $42,000. Attorney's fees are $18,000 (.30 * $60,000 = $18,000). The $30,000 belongs to Client.

II is proper because only one of the insurance companies paid. If the other insurance company does not pay, the amount of the settlement is $30,000. If Attorney sends the entire $30,000 to Client, Attorney may end up not getting any fees if Sureco does not pay. The $9,000 (.30 * $30,000) is in dispute so it is proper for Attorney to keep it in the Clients' Trust Account.

III is not proper because the $9,000 is in dispute. As such, Attorney may not transfer $9,000 to her personal account until the dispute is resolved.
"

"MR 3.9 requires a lawyer representing a client before a legislative body to disclose that the appearance is in a representative capacity. One purpose of MR 3.9 is to enable members of the non–adjudicative body to assess the biases that may influence the lawyer's testimony.

Here, Attorney's conduct was improper because Attorney was testifying on behalf of a private client and a private client was paying Attorney for the appearance. As such, Attorney was required to disclose that she was appearing before Congress in a representative capacity.
"

"Under MR 1.6(a), a lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent, the disclosure is impliedly authorized in order to carry out the representation or the disclosure is permitted by MR 1.6(b). Under MR 1.6(b), a lawyer may reveal information relating to the representation of a client to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary to: (1) prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm, (2) prevent the client from committing a crime or fraud that is reasonably certain to result in substantial injury to the financial interests or property of another and in furtherance of which the client has used or is using the lawyer's services, (3) prevent, mitigate or rectify substantial injury to the financial interests or property of another that is reasonably certain to result or has resulted from the client's commission of a crime or fraud in furtherance of which the client has used the lawyer's services, (4) secure legal advice about the lawyer's compliance with the Rules, (5) establish a claim or defense on behalf of the lawyer in a controversy between the lawyer and the client, to establish a defense to a criminal charge or civil claim against the lawyer based upon conduct in which the client was involved, or to respond to allegations in any proceeding concerning the lawyer's representation of the client, or (6) comply with other law or a court order.

Here, Attorney obtained Baker's settlement information during a legal representation. Such information needed to be kept confidential unless Baker consented to disclosing it to the IRS or an exception under MR 1.6(b) applied. Baker told Attorney not to provide information to the IRS so clearly Baker did not consent to disclosing the information. The IRS audit does not relate to any crime or fraud and the IRS did not have any claims against Attorney. As such, none of the MR 1.6(b) exceptions to keeping Baker's information confidential applied so it would be improper for Attorney to furnish this information to the IRS.
"

"Under MR 3.4, a lawyer shall not: (1) unlawfully obstruct another party's access to evidence or unlawfully alter, destroy or conceal a document or other material having potential evidentiary value (or counsel or assist another person to do any such act), or (2) falsify evidence, counsel or assist a witness to testify falsely, or offer an inducement to a witness that is prohibited by law. Furthermore, even if a witness has not been subpoenaed, MR 3.4(f) prohibits a lawyer from advising a witness to refrain from voluntarily giving relevant information to another party.

Here, Attorney unlawfully obstructed defense counsel's access to Witt by advising Witt to leave the jurisdiction two weeks before the trial date.
"

"Under MR 1.2(d), a lawyer may not knowingly counsel or assist a client in illegal conduct.

In this case, however, Attorney has not assisted in Client's illegal conduct as Attorney has not advised Client on how to avoid arrest/prosecution and the Attorney does not know where Client is hiding.
"

"A former government lawyer is prohibited from representing a client in connection with a matter in which the lawyer has personally and substantially participated as a public officer or employee [MR 1.11(a)]. A lawyer who had personal involvement will be disqualified even if the new representation is not adverse to the government.

Here, Attorney was a former government lawyer because Attorney worked as a part–time assistant county attorney. Attorney represented County in a criminal non–support proceeding against Husband. The civil action between Wife and Husband was related to the criminal case in which Attorney personally and substantially participated so Attorney would be subject to discipline for accepting employment in Wife's civil action against Husband.
"

"In the course of a representation, a lawyer must not communicate about the subject of the representation with a person (whether or not a party to the proceeding) that the lawyer knows is represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the lawyer: (1) has the consent of the other lawyer, or (2) is authorized to do so by law [MR 4.2]. A lawyer may not make communications prohibited by MR 4.2 through the acts of another [MR 4.2, cmt. [4]].

Here, if Attorney knew Claimant was represented by counsel, Attorney could not communicate directly with Claimant on the tort claims, or send an investigator to interview Claimant.
"

"Under MR 5.4(d), a lawyer may not practice with or in the form of a professional corporation or association authorized to practice law for profit if a non–lawyer is a corporate officer or occupies a position of similar responsibility in any form of association other than a corporation.

Here, Delta is subject to discipline because Veep, a non–lawyer, is an officer of a professional corporation engaged in the practice of law.
"

"A lawyer may not obtain or negotiate literary or media rights to a portrayal or account regarding a pending representation prior to the conclusion of the representation [MR 1.8(d)]. However, it is permissible to obtain as a fee a percentage of independent literary material that is the subject of the representation.

In this case, Attorney may not agree to Plaintiff's offer because the paternity suit is still pending.
"

"Under MR 1.7, a lawyer must not represent a client if the representation is directly adverse to another client or materially limited by the responsibilities to another client, a former client, a third party, or by the lawyer's own interests, unless (1) the lawyer reasonably believes she will be able to provide competent and diligent representation to each affected client, (2) the representation is not prohibited by law, (3) the representation does not involve the assertion of a claim by one client against another client represented by the same lawyer, and (4) each client gives informed consent in writing. A lawyer may limit the scope of the representation if the limitation is reasonable under the circumstances, and if the client gives informed consent [MR 1.2(c), cmt. [7]].

Here, the representation was proper because it was reasonable for Attorney to believe Attorney was able to provide competent and diligent representation to both Husband and Wife. The representation did not involve the assertion of a claim by Husband against Wife because the parties used the state's divorce procedure applicable to "no–fault" cases, wanted to resolve the matter amicably, and wanted to "split it all down the middle." They engaged Attorney to assist with a financial settlement agreement, not litigation. The clients' consent was informed and in writing.
"

"Generally, a lawyer cannot reveal information relating to the representation of a client, including information protected by the attorney–client privilege under applicable law [MR 1.6(a)]. However, disclosure is permitted, but not required, to establish a claim or defense on behalf of the lawyer in a controversy between the lawyer and the client, to establish a defense to a criminal charge or civil claim against the lawyer based upon conduct in which the client was involved, or to respond to allegations in any proceeding, including any disciplinary matter, concerning the lawyer's representation of the client [MR 1.6(b)(5)], or where a legal claim or disciplinary charge alleges complicity of the lawyer in the conduct of a client or a former client or other misconduct of the lawyer involving representation of the client or a former client, the lawyer may respond to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary to establish a defense. Such a charge can arise in a civil, criminal, disciplinary, or other proceeding and can be based on a wrong allegedly committed by the lawyer against the client or on a wrong alleged by a third person [MR 1.6, cmt. [10]]. The lawyer's right to respond arises when an assertion of such complicity has been made. The lawyer is not required to await the commencement of an action or proceeding that charges such complicity, so that the defense may be established by responding directly to a third party who has made such an assertion. The right to defend also applies where a proceeding commences [Id.]

Here, since Buyer claims Attorney engaged in fraud and violation of the state unfair trade practices statute and proceedings have commenced against Attorney alleging complicity in possible unlawful conduct of Client, Attorney may disclose the confidential information in defense.
"

"Under MR 8.4, it is impermissible for a lawyer to engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.

In this case, Attorney plans to falsely tell Employee she is not a suspect in theft, and that her answers to questions will be held in confidence. As such, Attorney would be subject to discipline if she so questions Employee.
"

"A judge should not initiate, permit, or consider ex parte communications concerning a pending or impending proceeding. Ex parte communication means a communication concerning a pending or impending matter, between counsel or an unrepresented party and the court when opposing counsel or an unrepresented party is not present, or any other communication made to the judge outside the presence of the parties or their lawyers. A judge may consult with court personnel whose function is to aid the judge in carrying out the judge?s adjudicative responsibilities, or with other judges, provided the judge makes all reasonable efforts to avoid receiving from court personnel, or other judges, factual information not part of a case record. A judge may not investigate facts in a matter independently, and may consider only the evidence presented and any facts that may properly be judicially noticed [CJC 2.9(C)].

Here, Judge, who presided at the nonjury trial, sent Clerk, her law clerk, to Manufacturer's plant to observe the machine that was malfunctioning. Judge initiated or considered ex parte communications concerning a pending proceeding. Judge used Clerk to investigate facts in a matter independently and used Clerk's research in rendering judgment. As such, Judge's conduct was improper.
"

"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.

In this case, Attorney was required to use the funds for Client's designated purpose to pay taxes when they became due, not for other purposes.
"

"MR 1.5(d)(2) provides a lawyer may not represent a defendant in a criminal case on a contingent fee basis.

In this case, Deft's payment of a fee (title to an automobile) was contingent on a successful outcome in the criminal case.
"

"MR 4.2 prohibits a lawyer from communicating about a matter with a person known to be represented in the matter unless (1) the person's lawyer consents to the communication, or (2) the communication is authorized by law. Under MR 8.4(a), a lawyer may not violate the rules directly or through the acts of another. If the opposing party is an organization, MR 4.2 cmt. [7] prohibits communications with a constituent of the organization who supervises, directs, or regularly consults with the organization's lawyer concerning the matter or has authority to obligate the organization with respect to the matter or whose act, or omission in connection with the matter may be imputed to the organization for purposes of civil or criminal liability. In communicating with a current or former constituent of an organization, a lawyer must not use methods of obtaining evidence that violate the legal rights of the organization [Id.]

Here, Pres is a constituent of Agri. Alpha filed a complaint on behalf of Client against Agri, a corporation. Alpha knows that Agri is represented by a lawyer because Beta, the lawyer for Agri, filed an answer and gave Alpha notice of the deposition of Pres. As such, Alpha may not interview Pres, unless Beta gives consent or the communication is authorized by law.
"

"Before any settlement offer or plea bargain is made or accepted on behalf of multiple clients, the lawyer must inform each client about all the material terms of the settlement, including what the other clients will receive or pay if the settlement or plea offer is accepted [MR 1.8(g)].

Here, the facts provide an aggregate settlement of the clients' claims. MR 1.8(g) requires 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."
"

"Each lawyer is obligated to report misconduct by another lawyer [MR 8.3, cmt. [1]]. A lawyer who knows another lawyer violates the Rules in a way that raises a substantial question as to the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer must report the violation to the appropriate professional authority [MR 8.3(a)]. MR 8.3 does not require disclosure of confidential information protected by MR 1.6, or if a lawyer learns of the Rules violation while serving as a member of an approved lawyers' assistance program that helps lawyers and judges with substance abuse [MR 8.3(c), cmt. [5]]. Generally, a lawyer cannot reveal information relating to the representation of a client, including information protected by the attorney–client privilege under applicable law [MR 1.6(a)]. MR 1.6 obligations to protect client disclosures includes information revealed when a person is a prospective client before the lawyer is retained, and disclosures that do not in themselves reveal protected information but could reasonably lead to the discovery of confidential information by a third person [MR 1.6, cmt. [4]]. However, disclosure is permitted, but not required, to prevent the commission of a crime by the client or other person [MR 1.6(b)(2)], or to mitigate substantial injury to the financial interests or property of another that has resulted from the client?s commission of an illegal or fraudulent act, in furtherance of which the client has used the lawyer's services [MR 1.6(b)(3)].

Here, the facts do not indicate Beta as belonging to the lawyers' assistance program that Alpha serves on, so Alpha is not prevented from reporting information on the criminal offenses based on his service on the bar association committee. However, Alpha agreed to represent Beta and Beta revealed the information prior to retaining Alpha. As such, Alpha has no duty to report Beta's misconduct because Alpha learned of Beta's criminal offenses when Beta was a prospective client.
"

"Regardless of the means used to make a lawyer's services known, any statements should be truthful [MR 7.1, cmt. [1]]. A lawyer may advertise through written, recorded, or electronic communication, including public media [MR 7.2(a)]. All ads must include the name and office address of at least one attorney or law firm [MR 7.2(c)].

Here, the parties advertise legal services through a newspaper, a form of public media. The ad states at least one attorney's name and the office address. As such, if the parties possess the degrees stated in the ad (i.e. the ad is truthful), Alpha and Beta are not subject to discipline.
"

"A lawyer may communicate confidential information to other lawyers in the firm, unless the client specifically instructs otherwise [MR 1.6, cmt. [5]].

Here, Alpha and Beta are partners in a law firm of Alpha and Beta. As such, Alpha may communicate Client information to Beta, unless of course, Client specifically objects.
"

"Under CJC 2.11(A), a judge must disqualify herself in a proceeding in which impartiality may reasonably be questioned, including where: (1) the judge has personal knowledge of the disputed facts in controversy, or (2) the judge knows the judge, the judge's spouse or domestic partner, or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them, or the spouse or domestic partner of such a person is: (a) a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, general partner, managing member, or trustee of a party, (b) acting as a lawyer in the proceeding, (c) has more than a de minimis interest that could be substantially affected by the proceeding, or (d) likely to be a material witness in the proceeding. Instead of withdrawing, a judge who might be disqualified for a reason other than bias or prejudice (which parties cannot agree to waive), may (1) disclose on the record the basis of the potential disqualification, and (2) ask the parties and their lawyers to consider, outside of the presence of the judge, whether to waive the disqualification. If the parties and their lawyers all agree that the judge should not be disqualified, then the judge may participate in the proceeding. This agreement must be incorporated into the record of the proceeding.

Here, Judge's brother, a person within the third degree to Judge, owns substantial stock (more than a de minimis interest) in the defendant corporation. Judge must disqualify himself in the proceeding, but since he disclosed on the record the basis of the potential disqualification, Judge may hear the case if all the parties and their lawyers independently, outside of the Judge's presence, agree in writing, to waive the disqualification.
"

"A lawyer may not knowingly offer evidence the lawyer knows to be false [MR 3.3(a)]. These duties apply even if compliance requires disclosure of information otherwise protected by MR 1.6 [MR 3.3(c)].

In this case, since Attorney knows Baker is lying, Attorney should not call Baker testify.
"

"Under 4.1(A), a judge or judicial candidate may not (1) knowingly or with reckless disregard for the truth, make a false or misleading statement, (2) make any statement that would reasonably be expected to affect the outcome or impair the fairness of a matter pending or impending in any court, or (3) in connection with cases, controversies, or issues likely to come before the court, make pledges, promises, or commitments that are inconsistent with the impartial performance of the adjudicative duties of judicial office.

I, II, and III are proper because they are all accurate factual statements. IV is not proper because in connection with criminal cases, controversies, or issues likely to come before the court, Attorney makes a pledge, promise, or commitment, which is inconsistent with impartial performance of adjudicative duties of judicial office.
"

"A judge may participate in activities sponsored by organizations or governmental entities concerned with the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice, and those sponsored by or on behalf of educational, religious, charitable, fraternal, or civic organizations not conducted for profit, including appearing or speaking at, receiving an award or other recognition at, being featured on the program of, and permitting her title to be used in connection with an event of such an organization or entity, provided the participation does not reflect adversely on the judge's independence, integrity, or impartiality [CJC 3.7(A)].

Here, it is proper for Judge to accept the offer from the state bar association because the activity is devoted to the improvement of law.
"

"A lawyer or any other lawyer associated with a firm or government agency, who is participating or has participated in the investigation or litigation of a matter, must not make an extrajudicial statement the lawyer knows or reasonably should know will be disseminated by public communication, and will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing an adjudicative proceeding in the matter [MR 3.6(a)]. Under MR. 3.6(b), a lawyer may state: (1) the claim, offense or defense involved and, except when prohibited by law, the identity of the persons involved, (2) information contained in a public record, (3) that an investigation of a matter is in progress, (4) the scheduling or result of any step in litigation, (5) a request for assistance in obtaining evidence and information necessary thereto, (6) a warning of danger concerning the behavior of a person involved, when there is reason to believe that there exists the likelihood of substantial harm to an individual or to the public interest, and (7) in a criminal case, in addition to subparagraphs (1) through (6): (a) the identity, residence, occupation and family status of the accused, (b) if the accused has not been apprehended, information necessary to aid in apprehension of that person, (c) the fact, time and place of arrest, and (d) the identity of investigating and arresting officers or agencies and the length of the investigation.

I is proper because the statement relates to a defense. II is proper because the statement relates to the scheduling of the next step in litigation. III is proper because the statement requests assistance in obtaining evidence.
"

"Under MR 1.1, cmt. [1], factors used to assess the sufficiency of a lawyer's knowledge and skill include whether it is feasible to refer the matter to, or associate or consult with, a lawyer of established competence in the field. In an emergency, a lawyer may give advice or assistance to a client in need, even if she lacks the skill or knowledge ordinarily required, and referral to or consultation with another lawyer is impractical [MR 1.1, cmt. [3]]. The lawyer should limit emergency assistance to that reasonably necessary under the circumstances [Id.].

In this case, it was proper for Attorney to assist Doctor in drafting and executing a will even though Attorney lacked competence because he had never prepared a will before. Doctor, however, believed she was dying so this was an emergency situation. Furthermore, there were no other attorneys available for Attorney to feasibly refer to, or associate or consult with. As such, it was proper for the Attorney to prepare the will.
"

"Generally, a lawyer cannot reveal information relating to the representation of a client, including information protected by the attorney-client privilege under applicable law [MR 1.6(a)]. A lawyer may not assist another person in the unauthorized practice of law [MR 5.5, cmt. [1]]. A lawyer may employ the services of paraprofessionals and delegate functions to them, as long as the lawyer supervises and retains responsibility for their work [MR 5.5, cmt. [2]]. Considerations in determining whether an activity constitutes the practice of law include: (1) activity involves legal knowledge and skill beyond that which the average layperson possesses, (2) activity constitutes advice or services concerning binding legal rights or remedies, and (3) activity is traditionally performed by lawyers [MR 5.5]. Courts have found these activities, when done on behalf of another, to constitute law practice: (1) appearing in judicial proceedings, (2) engaging in settlement negotiations, and (3) drafting documents that affect substantial legal rights or obligations (e.g. contracts, wills, trusts). A lawyer may communicate confidential information to other lawyers in the firm, unless the client specifically instructs otherwise [MR 1.6, cmt. [5]]. A lawyer may not practice with or in the form of a professional corporation, or association authorized to practice law for profit, if a non-lawyer owns an interest therein [MR 5.4(c)].

Here, Attorney borrowed heavily from Bank, but the Bank does not have an equity interest in the law firm. The part-time office manager, a Bank employee, advises the firm on administrative matters, such as fees, time charges, and program matters for the computer services, not activities that constitute the practice of law. Attorney retains responsibility for the work of the office manager because the office manager consults with Attorney. However, since the Bank employee is not a lawyer or employee of the law firm, Attorney may not reveal confidences of client to Bank.
"

"A lawyer may collect a fee through a credit card or by arranging a bank loan for a client. The lawyer may take an interest-bearing promissory note for a fee. A contingent fee requires the client to pay a fee (or a bonus) only if there is a favorable outcome [MR 1.5(c)]. A lawyer may accept a contingency fee except in criminal cases when representing a defendant, or in domestic relations cases [MR 1.5(d)]. A lawyer may advance court costs and other expenses of litigation, the repayment of which may be contingent on the outcome of the matter [MR 1.8(e)(1)]. Under such an arrangement, if the client does not prevail in the case, the lawyer absorbs the costs and expenses.

Here, Attorney can represent Client in a personal injury case on a contingent fee basis according to MR 1.5(d). Attorney may also arrange for a bank loan to advance the expenses for trial preparation, so Attorney is not subject to discipline if she guarantees Client?s promissory note.
"

"MR 4.2 prohibits a lawyer from communicating about a matter with a person known to be represented in the matter unless (1) the person's lawyer consents to the communication, or (2) the communication is authorized by law.

In this case, Alpha knows Plaintiff is represented by an attorney, Beta so Alpha may not communicate with Plaintiff unless Beta consents or the serving of the copy of the motion and tender is authorized by statute or rule of court.
"

"A lawyer is prohibited from making an agreement in which a restriction on the lawyer's right to practice is part of the settlement of a client controversy [MR 5.6(b)].

In this case, the proposed settlement is not proper because it restricts Alpha's right to represent Wife in the future.
"

"In general, a lawyer must hold funds and property of clients or third parties separate from the lawyer's own property [MR 1.15(a)]. When two or more persons (one of whom may be the lawyer) claim interest in the client's property, the lawyer must keep it separate until the dispute is resolved. However, the lawyer must promptly distribute all portions of the property not in dispute [MR 1.5(e)].

II is proper because Plaintiff agreed to pay Attorney $3,000 so Attorney is able to transfer these earned fees to Attorney's office account. However, Attorney billed Plaintiff $5,000 so $2,000 is in dispute and must be retained in the Clients' Trust Account until the dispute is resolved. Attorney, however, must also distribute to Plaintiff the remaining $20,000 that is not in dispute.
"

Under MR 3.4, a lawyer cannot during trial, allude to an irrelevant matter or one that is unsupported by admissible evidence, assert personal knowledge of facts in issue other than when testifying as a witness or state a personal opinion as to the justness of a cause, the witness' credibility, a civil litigant's liability, or a defendant's guilt or innocence. Here, Attorney asserted in closing statement during trial Attorney's personal knowledge of the streets.

A lawyer may counsel non-lawyers who wish to proceed pro se [MR 5.5, cmt. [3]]. Attorney is not subject to discipline for giving legal advice to Plaintiff because Plaintiff is representing himself.

"Generally, a lawyer cannot reveal information relating to the representation of a client, including information protected by the attorney-client privilege under applicable law [MR 1.6(a)]. This obligation includes disclosures that do not in themselves reveal confidential information but could reasonably lead to discovery of protected information by a third person [MR 1.6, cmt. [4]]. The duty of confidentiality applies not only to matters communicated in confidence by the client, but also to all information relating to the representation from any source [MR 1.6, cmt. [3]]. This includes information acquired before the lawyer was retained that relates to the representation.

Here, Client stated to Attorney that before he consulted Attorney, he committed perjury. The information relates to the representation of Client. Though the perjury event occurs before Client retains Attorney, the information is protected, and Attorney cannot inform the authorities of the perjury.
"

Under MR 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.