Quiz-F13-Class12
Annotations
1. Clarence
Darrow decides that there is a significant risk that his own interests would
adversely affect his representation of the railroad on the strike committee.
Which of the following actions, by itself, would be sufficient to avoid
violation of GRPC 1.7 (assuming it applies to Darrow)?
If informed
consent is required by 1,7, (A), (B) and (C) would all be necessary.
A.
Confirm in writing the consent of the railroad's president to Darrow's
representation of the railroad on the strike committee.
B.
Give the railroad president the opportunity to consult with the General Counsel
about whether Darrow should represent the company on the strike committee.
C.
Provide the railroad president in writing reasonable and adequate information
about the risks of having Darrow represent the company on the strike committee.
✓
D. Obtain the president's informed consent to limiting the scope of
representation so that Darrow did not represent the railroad on any issue
relating to the strike.
But the
threshold question is there a significant risk?If not, no consent is required. Darrow eliminated
the significant risk that his representation of the railroad would be adversely affected by limiting his representation to avoid conflict with his personal
interests.
2. 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.
The law firm had obtained personal financial information about Danford, but Danforth was not its client.
B.
Danforth was not one of the original incorporators of MRIGM.
Danforth was one of the original incorporators but that did not
create a personal attorney-client relationship between him and the law firm.
C.
Danforth did not serve as the main contact between MRIGM and DeWitt.
Danforth did serve as the main contact.
✓ D. None of the
above
Illustrates
the difference between representing a person and representing the corporate
entity.
E.
All of the above.
3. 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.
“Noreen, as
stakeholder for the proceeds, could deposit them in the superior court registry
and file a claim for interpleader”
B.
To distribute the settlement proceeds to the corporation’s stockholders.
“The corporation's interest was in
maximizing its share of the proceeds and in disbursing the proceeds to its creditors”
C.
To follow the directions of the corporation’s president as to distribution of
the settlement proceeds.
See annotation to B.
D.
None of the above.
E.
All of the above.
4. 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.
No. This is an exception under GRPC 1.6(b)(i) not GRPC 1.13
✓ B. Disclosure is necessary to prevent substantial
injury to the corporation.
Rule 1.13(c)(2): “[I]f the lawyer reasonably believes that the
violation is reasonably certain to result in substantial injury to the
organization, then the lawyer may reveal information relating to the
representation whether or not Rule 1.6 permits such disclosure, but only if and
to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary to prevent substantial
injury to the organization.” GLE p. 41
C.
The lawyer’s services have been used by the corporation to commit a crime or
fraud.
No, this is an exception under ABA Model
Rule 1.6(b) after the 2003 amendments.
D.
None of the above.
E.
All of the above.