Class 12: Possible Quiz Questions

 

1.         In Jesse v Danforth the Supreme Court of Wisconsin held that the DeWitt law firm’s representation of MRIGM did not disqualify it from representing the plaintiff in a medical malpractice action against one of the MRIGM shareholders, Dr. Clarke Danforth, because:

            A.        DeWitt had not obtained any personal financial information about Danforth through its representation of MRIGM

            B.        Danforth was not one of the original incorporators of MRIGM

            C.        Danforth did not serve as the main contact between MRIGM and DeWitt

            D.        None of the above

            E.        All of the above


 

2.         In Willner’s Fuel Distributors Inc. v Noreen, the Supreme Court of Alaska held that when the attorney for Rosson & Company, Inc. received a $100,000 settlement payment it would have been proper for the attorney:

            A.        To deposit the funds into the superior court registry and file a claim for interpleader

            B.        To distribute the settlement proceeds to the corporation’s stockholders

            C.        To follow the directions of the corporation’s president as to distribution of the settlement proceeds

            D.        None of the above

            E.        All of the above

 

3.         Under GRPC 1.13 (Organization as Client) which of the following is a necessary condition that must be met before the lawyer representing a corporation may disclose confidential information to law enforcement authorities?

            A.        Disclosure is necessary to prevent substantial financial loss to a third party

            B.        Disclosure is necessary to prevent substantial injury to the corporation

            C.        The lawyer’s services have been used by the corporation to commit a crime or fraud

            D.        None of the above

            E.        All of the above