Quiz for Section X: Communications About Legal Services
No, because both law and medicine are licensed professions.
No, if they possess the degree(s) stated.
Yes, because the reference to the M.D. degree is self-laudatory.
Yes, unless they limit their practice to areas in which a medical degree is relevant.
Rate this question:
No, because the letterhead states the jurisdictions in which each partner is admitted.
Yes, because there is no jurisdiction in which both Alpha and Beta are admitted to practice.
Yes, because the firm name used by each office contains the name of a lawyer not admitted to practice in that jurisdiction.
Yes, unless Delta actively practices law in both States First and Second.
Rate this question:
No, because Attorney's fee was a reasonable charge for the time expended.
No, because Attorney, when the representation was accepted, did not anticipate the tax problems.
Yes, unless Client pays the fee without protest.
Yes, because Attorney charged a fee in excess of the advertised fee.
Rate this question:
Yes, if Attorney has any reason to believe that Testatrix has another lawyer.
Yes, because Attorney would be soliciting legal business from a person who is not a current client.
No, provided Attorney does not thereafter prepare a new will for Testatrix.
No, because Testatrix is a former client of Attorney.
Rate this question:
Yes, because the qualifications of the lawyers are not stated.
Yes, because the radio broadcast may encourage litigation.
No, if all the statements in the radio broadcast are true.
No, unless the radio broadcast is heard outside the state in which they are licensed.
Rate this question:
Yes, because Beta was deceased when Alpha made the arrangement with Gamma.
Yes, because Gamma is not a partner of Alpha.
No, because Alpha and Beta were partners at the time of Beta's death.
No, because Gamma is paying a share of the rent and office expenses.
Rate this question:
Yes, because Attorney is soliciting business from persons with whom Attorney had no prior relationship.
Yes, because Attorney requires the use of a coupon.
No, if Attorney provides the services described for the fee stated.
No, unless Attorney is seeking business from persons who are already represented by a lawyer.
Rate this question:
Yes.
No, unless Attorney's fees are lower than those generally charged in the area where she practices.
No, because she used a professional actor for the television advertisement.
No, if she makes a charge for the initial consultation.
Rate this question:
Yes, because it was mailed to persons who had not been his clients.
Yes, because his service as governor is unrelated to his ability as a lawyer.
No, because the information in the announcement is true.
No, because all of the information was already in the public domain.
Rate this question:
III only
I and II, but not III
I, II, and III
Neither I, II, nor III
Rate this question:
Yes, unless the state offers free continuing legal education courses.
Yes, if Gamma independently undertakes continuing study and education in the law.
No, because Gamma cannot maintain competence without attending continuing legal education courses.
No, unless Gamma obtains malpractice insurance.
Rate this question:
III only
I and II, but not III
I and III, but not II
I, II, and III
Rate this question:
Yes, because his actions involve dishonesty or misrepresentation.
Yes, but only if he is first convicted of a criminal offense in State Second.
No, because his action was not in his capacity as an attorney.
No, because his action was not in State First.
Rate this question:
Transfer the $800 to the "Fee Account."
Transfer $300 to the "Fee Account" and leave $500 in the "Clients' Fund Account" until Attorney's fee for the final appeal is determined.
Transfer $300 to the "Fee Account" and send Deft a $500 check on the "Clients' Fund Account."
Send Deft a $500 check and leave $300 in the "Clients' Fund Account" until the matter is resolved with Deft.
Rate this question:
Yes, because none of the matters previously investigated is involved in or affects the present case.
Yes, unless Alpha might be prejudiced against Deft because of the prior investigation.
No, if Alpha had substantial responsibility in initiating the previous investigation of Deft.
No, if Alpha had substantial responsibility in determining that the previous investigation did not establish any basis for prosecution.
Rate this question:
Yes, if Landlord did not object to Attorney's advice and paid Plaint's claim.
Yes, because Attorney may refer to both legal and nonlegal considerations in advising a client.
No, unless Attorney's engagement letter informed Landlord that Attorney's advice on the matter would include both legal and nonlegal considerations.
No, because in advising Landlord to pay the full claim, Attorney failed to represent zealously Landlord's legal interests.
Rate this question:
Yes, because Attorney is giving legal advice to persons who are not his clients.
Yes, because Attorney is aiding Bank in the unauthorized practice of law.
No, because no charge is made for Attorney's advice.
No, because Attorney is a member of the bar.
Rate this question:
Yes, because neither referral nor consultation was practical under the circumstances.
Yes, because Gamma was a close relative of Able.
No, because Gamma had no special training or experience in criminal cases.
No, because Gamma did not have the requisite level of competence to accept representation in the case.
Rate this question:
II only
I and II, but not III
I, II, and III
Neither I, II, nor III
Rate this question:
I only
II only
I and II, but not III
II and III, but not I
Rate this question:
I only
I and II, but not III
I and III, but not II
I, II, and III
Rate this question:
I only
I and II, but not III
II and III, but not I
I, II, and III
Rate this question:
Yes, if Alpha does not reveal to Beta any confidence or secret learned while an assistant district attorney.
Yes, because a public prosecutor must make timely disclosure to the defense attorney of any exculpatory evidence.
No, unless Alpha agrees not to participate in the representation of Deft.
No, because Alpha had substantial responsibility for the indictment of Deft.
Rate this question:
Yes, if it is necessary to do so in order to protect Attorney's rights.
Yes, because Client had committed a fraud on the court in which the case was tried.
No, because Attorney learned the facts from Client in confidence.
No, if disclosure by Attorney could result in Client's prosecution for perjury.
Rate this question:
I only
II only
I and II, but not III
I, II, and III
Rate this question:
I only
I and II, but not III or IV
I and III, but not II or IV
I and IV, but not II or III
Rate this question:
I only
I and II, but not III
I and III, but not II
I, II, and III
Rate this question:
I only
II only
I and II, but not III
I, II, and III
Rate this question:
I only
I and II, but not III
II and III, but not I
I, II, and III
Rate this question:
Yes, unless Client's consent is in writing.
Yes, because Alpha will not try the case.
No, if the division of the fee between Alpha and Beta is in proportion to actual work done by each.
No, because the total fee does not differ from that contracted for by Alpha with Client.
Rate this question:
Yes, if Alpha believes Beta clearly was guilty of professional misconduct.
Yes, unless Alpha believes Beta does not usually neglect matters entrusted to him.
No, if Client was satisfied by Beta's return of the retainer.
No, unless Client agrees that Alpha may report the information.
Rate this question:
II and IV, but not I or III
I, III, and IV, but not II
II, III, and IV, but not I
I, II, III, and IV
Rate this question:
I only
III only
I and III, but not II
I, II, and III
Rate this question:
Yes, Alpha may give $5,000 to Beta personally for his campaign.
Yes, if Alpha's contribution to Beta is made anonymously.
No, because Alpha is practicing before the court to which Beta seeks election.
No, unless Alpha gives the $5,000 to a committee formed to further Beta's election.
Rate this question:
Yes, because Attorney made a false statement of fact to Buyer.
Yes, because Attorney exaggerated the profitability of the business.
No, because Attorney represented Seller, not Buyer.
No, because Attorney's statement constitutes acceptable puffing in negotiations.
Rate this question:
Yes, unless Alpha's time was completely occupied with work for other clients.
Yes, because Alpha neglected the representation of Passenger.
No, because Passenger's suit was filed before the statute of limitations ran.
No, because Alpha returned the $1,000 retainer to Passenger.
Rate this question:
Yes, because Alpha knew that Beta had been retained by Insco to represent Defendant.
Yes, because Alpha failed to extend professional courtesy to another lawyer.
No, because Alpha is properly representing her client's interests.
No, because any judgment will be satisfied by Insco.
Rate this question:
Yes, because the official records of the commission would have disclosed the truth.
Yes, because Judge had not been reprimanded.
No, because Attorney reasonably relied on the director's information.
No, because Judge was a candidate in a contested election.
Rate this question:
Yes, if Attorney's contributions are made without consideration of candidates' merits.
Yes, because Attorney implied that Attorney receives favored treatment by judges.
No, if Attorney's statements were true.
No, because the prospective client did not retain Attorney.
Rate this question:
Yes, because Attorney has no interest in the case.
Yes, if Judge believes that Attorney's advice is needed to serve the interests of justice.
No, unless all parties in the case first give their written consent to Judge's consultation with Attorney.
No, unless Judge informs the parties of Attorney's identity and the substance of Attorney's advice, and asks for their responses.
Rate this question:
Yes, because both parties were given full opportunity to present their views on the issues in the case.
Yes, because Attorney did not make any suggestion as to how Judge should decide the matter.
No, because Attorney communicated with Judge on a pending matter without advising opposing counsel.
No, because Attorney caused Judge to reopen a case that had been taken under advisement.
Rate this question:
Yes, because Attorney is restricting his right to practice.
Yes, because Attorney is aiding Trustco in the practice of law.
No, because Attorney is not charging the customer for his services.
No, because Attorney is not giving advice to Trustco's customers.
Rate this question:
Yes, if all information relevant to the litigation was received by Attorney in the presence of both Husband and Wife.
Yes, if there is reason to believe Husband misled both Wife and Attorney at the time of the prior agreement.
No, because Attorney had previously acted for both parties in reaching the agreement now in dispute.
No, unless Husband is now represented by independent counsel.
Rate this question:
I only
I and II, but not III
I and III, but not II
I, II, and III
Rate this question:
II only
III only
I and II, but not III
II and III, but not I
Rate this question:
Yes, because Deft suffered a detriment from Attorney's refusal to plea bargain.
Yes, if Attorney in fact received widespread publicity as a result of the trial.
No, unless Prosecutor has knowledge that Attorney's refusal to plea bargain was due to personal motives.
No, if Attorney zealously and competently represented Deft at the trial.
Rate this question:
Yes, because Attorney knowingly used false testimony.
Yes, if Driver committed a felony when he obtained the driver's license under an assumed name.
No, because Attorney's knowledge of Driver's true name was obtained during the course of representation.
No, unless Driver's true name is an issue in the proceeding.
Rate this question:
III only
II and III, but not I
I, II, and III
Neither I, II, nor III
Rate this question:
Quiz Review Timeline (Updated): Apr 4, 2014 +
Our quizzes are rigorously reviewed, monitored and continuously updated by our expert board to maintain accuracy, relevance, and timeliness.