PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY: HEROES & VILLAINS
Wednesday Section

EXERCISE ONE (Simon Case): Part One
WRITING ASSIGNMENT: PART ONE (20% of Course Grade)
ONLY STUDENTS IN GROUP A DO THIS ASSIGNMENT

Preliminary Task
Due: Noon on Monday, February 4
All members of Group A must send me an email by noon, Monday, February 4, confirming that they have been able to view the video of the Group A-1 interview by including in the email the first sentence spoken after time code 9:00. The purpose of this email is to let me know before our next class meeting whether any of you have difficulty viewing the videos. That gives me a chance to talk with you before or after class if need be. The Sunday before the paper is due is not a good time for you to find out that you cannot view the video. The videos will be posted on the course web site by Friday, February 1 and possibly earlier. I will send an email notifying Group A as soon as the videos are posted.
Generally students encounter three problems:
1) They do not have Quicktime installed on their computer and get confused about the procedure for downloading a free version from the internet
2) They do not have a sufficiently fast internet connection at home to view the video. (A dial-up modem connection often produces a frustrating viewing experience.) The answer is usually to view the video at the law school's computer lab. (Bring a set of your own headphones to the computer lab.)
3) Difficulty hearing the video. Using headphones often solves this problem, especially if you are using a laptop (which often have very weak external speakers), though sometimes students do not understand how to set the internal volume controls on their own computer.

Main Assignment

Due: Before commencement of class on February 13. The paper grade will be reduced by the equivalent of a full letter grade (e.g. A to B, D to F) if submitted late without good cause.

Format: Double-spaced, 12 point, one inch margins on all sides. 5-7 pages. Please submit as an email attachment in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, or Rich Text Format. Papers receiving a grade of B+ or better may be posted on the course web site; your name and the actual grade will not be posted. Place your name at the top of the first page, only, and do not place your name in a header or footer. Please title your text file: S08W-Ex1-1[initials]. (For example, if I submitted a paper in Word Perfect, the text file would be named S08W-Ex1-1CC.wpd.) Email your paper to me AND to my assistant Karen Butler (kpbutler@gsu.edu). Number the pages of your paper and begin on page one without a separate cover sheet. (You may insert a footer or header for pagination.)

Citations: You are encouraged to make good use of relevant readings assigned for class in writing your analysis. You may simply cite to a Model Rule using the format: MR __._ ( ), e.g. MR 1.6(b)(2). Because the readings are web-based, there is no standard pagination for most of the assigned readings. Therefore you do not have to provide full Blue Book citation, except for cases. (You do not have to provide internal page citations for cases published on the course web site.) If you cite to an article or book excerpt assigned for reading, it is sufficient to use the author and title information provided in the syllabus.

Citation format for videotaped interviews: "A1: 3:00-3:20" would cite to a 20 second segment during the Group A1 interview, beginning 3 minutes into the tape. Please do not refer to the lawyer or client by the name of the student playing the role. Simply refer to "the lawyer" and "the client" or "Simon." If you are comparing the two interviews, refer to the "A-1 lawyer" or the "A-2 client." If you played either the client or lawyer, though, you may refer to yourself in the first person. I will edit out any such first person references, if your paper is posted as a sample "B+ or better" paper on the course web site to preserve your anonymity.

Subject: Analyze the interview conducted in your own subgroup citing to specific time marks on the videotape.Your analysis can include comparisons with the meeting conducted by the other subgroup, citing time marks.

Discuss:
( 1) whether the explanation of confidentiality given to the client (a) accurately described what the Model Rules require, prohibit and permit, (b) was comprehensible to the client, and (c) effectively encouraged the client to trust the lawyer; and

(2) how the lawyer did or did not conduct the interview so as to learn the client's "story."

Conclude your analysis by proposing alternative ways, viewing the interview with the wisdom of hindsight, that the lawyer in your subgroup could have explained confidentiality and learned the client's story. If you played the client, you can refer to how you felt. If you observed, you can refer to how the client reported feeling or how you imagine you would have felt, but do NOT in this writing assignment disclose the confidential information given in the client instructions.