What We are Covering: §V Competence & Leftovers

1. What We are Covering: §V Competence & Leftovers III. Exceptions to the general rule that lawyers aren’t public utilities (pro bono 6.1; court appointments 6.2; other [anti-discrimination] law; Duty to Reject) IV. ENDING THE LAWYER-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP [1.16] - must, may, and how: mandatory and permissive withdrawal; court permission [Possible bonus from omitted case Whiting – Standard of Review] V(A). Discipline(p.92) • Rules 1.1(competence); see also 1.3 & 1.4 • Rules 5.1, 5.2, 5.3 (supervision & system responsibilities) • Rules 8.4, 8.5 (authority for discipline) • Problems 2-26 to 2-31 V(B). Malpractice Liability (p.103) • Elements and Kinds of Malpractice [RS §48 et seq.] • Rules: 1.2(c) – limiting the scope of representation • Rule 1.8(h) – prospectively limiting or settling liability • Scope (addresses the use of ethics rules in malpractice cases) • Examples: Ziegelheim p. 107; Lernerp. 115; ABA Formal Op. 02-425 p. 112;] • Problems 2-32 to 2-36 V(C). Ineffective Assistance of Counsel (p.122) • Case omitted; use Problem 2-37 to review the facts & learn

2. Question 2-26 (p. 92) Attorney represented Plaintiff in an action against several defendants. The retainer agreement provided that Plaintiff would pay all costs and expenses of litigation and would, on demand, reimburse Attorney for any costs or expenses advanced by Attorney. After serving process on two defendants, Attorney had difficulty locating and serving the remaining defendants. Plaintiff approved the hiring of an investigator to locate and serve the defendants, and Attorney advanced the costs for the investigator. When Attorney asked Plaintiff for reimbursement, Plaintiff refused to pay. Attorney then told Plaintiff that Attorney would do no more work on the case until Attorney was reimbursed for the amount advanced. Thereafter, one of the defendants filed a counterclaim that required a responsive pleading within thirty days. Because Attorney had not been paid, Attorney permitted the time to respond to the counterclaim to expire without filing a responsive pleading, and a default was entered on the counterclaim. Later, Plaintiff reimbursed Attorney for the costs Attorney had advanced, and Attorney was successful in having the default on the counterclaim set aside. The case was tried, and Plaintiff prevailed on Plaintiff's complaint, and the counterclaimant recovered nothing. Is Attorney subject to discipline for not initially filing a responsive pleading to the counterclaim?

3. Question 2-27 (p. 93) Witness was subpoenaed to appear and testify at a state legislative committee hearing. Witness retained Attorney to represent her at the hearing. During the hearing, Attorney, reasonably believing that it was in Witness's best interest not to answer, advised Witness not to answer certain questions on the grounds that Witness had a constitutional right not to answer. The committee chairperson directed Witness to answer and cautioned her that refusal to answer was a misdemeanor and that criminal prosecution would be instituted if she did not answer. Upon Attorney's advice, Witness persisted in her refusal to answer. Witness was subsequently convicted for her refusal to answer. Is Attorney subject to discipline?

4. Question 2-28 (p. 94) 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 a 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?

5. Question 2-29 (p. 94) 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. Was the attorney's conduct proper?

6. Question 2-30 (p. 96) 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. Is the attorney subject to discipline?

7. Question 2-31 (p. 97). Attorney has a highly efficient staff of paraprofessional legal assistants, all of whom are graduates of recognized legal assistant educational programs. Recently, the statute of limitations ran against a claim of a client of Attorney's when a legal assistant negligently misplaced Client's file and suit was not filed within the time permitted by law. Which of the following correctly states Attorney's professional responsibility? • Attorney is subject to civil liability and is also subject to discipline on the theory of respondeat superior. • Attorney is subject to civil liability or is subject to discipline at Client's election. • Attorney is subject to civil liability but is NOT subject to discipline unless Attorney failed to supervise the legal assistant adequately. • Attorney is NOT subject to civil liability and is NOT subject to discipline if Attorney personally was not negligent.

8. Question 2-32 (p.105) 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?

9. Question 2-33 (p. 105) • Jane Lawyer represents Ron Client in settling a dispute with his employer. After Jane explained the terms of the settlement to Ron, he knowingly and voluntarily agreed to it. The terms of the settlement were fair. Ron later learns that his friend Lester had received a significantly better settlement based on a similar dispute with their mutual employer. Ron retains counsel to sue Jane Lawyer for malpractice. Ron is: • Not barred from suing Jane Lawyer. • Barred from suing Jane Lawyer because he voluntarily agreed to the settlement. • Barred from suing Jane Lawyer because the settlement was fair. • Barred from suing Jane Lawyer unless Jane intentionally mislead Ron regarding the terms of the settlement.

10. Question 2-34 (p. 111) 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?

11. Question 2-35 (p. 111) Attorney represented Buyer in a real estate transaction. Due to Attorney's negligence in drafting the purchase agreement, Buyer was required to pay for a survey that should have been paid by Seller, the other party to the transaction. Attorney fully disclosed this negligence to Buyer, and Buyer suggested that he would be satisfied if Attorney simply reimbursed Buyer for the entire cost of the survey. Although Buyer might have recovered additional damages if a malpractice action were filed, Attorney reasonably believed that the proposed settlement was fair to Buyer. Accordingly, in order to forestall a malpractice action, Attorney readily agreed to make the reimbursement. Attorney drafted a settlement agreement, and it was executed by both Attorney and Buyer. Was Attorney's conduct proper?

12. Question 2-36 (p. 114) 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?

13. Question 2-37 (p. 122) Rascal was convicted of murder. In preparing for the sentencing phase of the case, Rascal's lawyer Matlock investigated potential mitigation evidence. Matlock spoke with Rascal and five of his family members who described Rascal's childhood and mental condition as normal. Matlock also consulted with mental health experts who did not offer helpful mitigation evidence. Matlock was aware that the prosecution was planning to introduce evidence of Rascal's previous convictions for a violent rape, as well as a juvenile record. Matlock did not examine the files of the earlier cases. If he had done so, he would have discovered mitigation evidence of schizophrenia, organic brain damage, alcoholism, and serious childhood problems. Rascal is sentenced to death. He appeals claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. What do you think the resultshould be? [This question restates the facts of the omitted case Rompilla.]