Examen
MPRE PRACTICE EXAM I REVIEW QUESTIONS & ANSWERS RATED 100% CORRECT!!
- Cours
- Établissement
MPRE PRACTICE EXAM I REVIEW QUESTIONS & ANSWERS RATED 100% CORRECT!!
[Montrer plus]
Aperçu du contenu
MPRE PRACTICE EXAM I REVIEW QUESTIONS& ANSWERS RATED 100% CORRECT!!
A toy manufacturer was sued by the parent of a child injured by one of its
products. As the manufacturer's attorney was preparing to respond to a
discovery request from the plaintiff, the attorney found a document that was
very damaging to his client's case. Prior to complying with the discovery
request and turning over the document, the attorney called his opposing
counsel and offered to settle the case. The attorney stated that although he
believed his client was very likely to win a summary judgment motion, they
would settle the case for a modest amount to save the costs of litigation. In
fact, the attorney believed his client had no chance of winning a summary
judgment motion and was also likely to lose at trial based on the document he
had found. The opposing counsel declined the attorney's offer. The attorney
turned over the document, and the case proceeded to trial, where judgment
was awarded to the plaintiff. Answer - c. Yes, because the attorney's statement
did not constitute a statement of fact.
Answer choice A is incorrect because the attorney did not make a false
statement of material fact; this statement constituted permissible puffing.
Answer choice B is incorrect because although an attorney is prohibited from
making false statements of material fact, an attorney does not owe the duty of
candor to opposing counsel that she owes to the court. Answer choice D is
incorrect because although the opposing counsel did not accept the attorney's
offer and hence the plaintiff was not harmed by the attorney's statements, the
absence of harm does not prevent an attorney's action from being a violation
of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct.
Section: Lawyer As Negotiator
,An attorney was convinced that his client was suffering from dementia. The
attorney spoke to his client's family physician and the client's only daughter to
determine whether a guardian should be appointed to monitor the client's
finances. These were the only discussions the attorney had ever had with
either the physician or the daughter. In these discussions, the attorney revealed
confidential information about a bank account maintained by the client before
learning that the daughter and her mother were estranged because the
daughter had stolen from her mother in the past. Was the attorney's revelation
of the confidential information proper?
a. Yes, because the attorney was trying to determine whether his client needed
a guardian.
b. Yes, because the daughter had relevant information to help determine
whether the client needed a guardian.
c. No, because the attorney should not have disclosed confidential informatio
Answer - d. No, because the attorney did not first determine whether either
the doctor or his client's daughter might act adversely to his client's interests.
Answer choice A is incorrect because, while the attorney may disclose
confidential information when taking protective action for a client with
diminished capacity, he should first consider whether it is likely that the person
consulted will act adversely to the client's interests. Here, the daughter, based
on her past interaction with her mother, could take action that would be
antithetical to her mother's financial interests. Answer choice B is incorrect
because, although the daughter likely had relevant information, whether the
information is relevant is not the only consideration. Answer choice C is
incorrect because prior court approval is not required.
Section: Scope, Objective, And Means Of The Representation
In representing a client in litigation involving a boundary dispute, an attorney,
after consultation with and approval by the client, employed a surveyor. The
attorney, who had used and compensated the surveyor in previous, similar
,situations for other clients, described the purpose of the survey and the party
she represented to the surveyor. The retainer agreement between the attorney
and the client specified that the client was responsible for payment of all
litigation expenses. The surveyor performed a survey of the disputed boundary
and submitted an invoice to the attorney for the agreed-upon amount. Prior to
payment of this invoice, the client, in direct conversation with his neighbor,
reached an agreement over the boundary between their properties. The client
paid the attorney her fee as agreed upon in the retainer agreement but refused
to pay the attorney for the cost of the survey. Is the attorney likely subj Answer
- d. Yes, because of the nature of the services rendered by the surveyor.
Answer choice A is incorrect because, although the client was contractually
obligated to pay litigation expenses (as is generally required by the Model Rules
of Professional Conduct except in the case of a contingency fee arrangement or
an indigent client), the attorney is liable to the surveyor; note, though, that the
attorney is entitled to seek reimbursement from the client for the payment of
the surveyor's bill. Answer choice B is incorrect because, although the client
was consulted about and approved the hiring of the surveyor, the attorney is
liable to the surveyor, even though the attorney is entitled to seek
reimbursement from the client for payment of the surveyor's bill. Answer
choice C is incorrect because the Model Rules of Professional Conduct
generally require the client, not the attorney, to bear responsibility for the
payment of litigation expenses.
Section: Civil Liability To Non-clients
A plaintiff filed a personal injury complaint, and the case was assigned to a
judge. After the defendant was served, a partner from a large law firm filed an
appearance on behalf of the defendant. The judge's niece was a salaried
associate in the estate planning department of the law firm representing the
plaintiff. At the initial scheduling conference, the judge disclosed this
relationship to the parties. Subsequently, the judge also disclosed that a person
listed by the plaintiff as a material witness was his wife's nephew. Neither the
niece nor the nephew resided in the judge's household. Neither party moved
to disqualify the judge. Other than the disclosures made by the judge, there
, were no grounds upon which the judge's impartiality could be reasonably
questioned. Should the judge disqualify himself from presiding over this
action?
a. Yes, because of the judge's relationship with a member of the law firm
repres Answer - b. Yes, because of the judge's familial relationship with the
material witness.
Answer choice A is incorrect because a judge must disqualify himself in a
matter if he knows that he or his spouse or domestic partner shares a third-
degree or closer relationship to an attorney who represents a party in the case.
A third-degree relationship includes a niece of the judge. However, the
employment of the judge's niece as a lawyer by the same law firm as the
attorney who represents a party does not automatically require the judge to
disqualify himself unless the niece has more than a de minimis interest that
could be affected by the proceedings. Since the niece was not employed by the
department of the firm handling the case and since the income of the niece, as
a salaried associate, would not be directly affected by the outcome of the case,
the niece's interest in the case likely was de minimis. Accordingly, the judge's
impartiality probably cannot be reasonably questioned on the grounds of his
relationship with his niece, making B a better answer. Answer choice C is
incorrect because a judge may be required to disqualify himself even if a party
does not seek his disqualification. Answer choice D is incorrect because,
although the standard for disqualification when a relative of the judge has an
economic interest in the subject matter of the controversy or is a party to the
proceeding is based in part on whether the relative resides in the judge's
household, disqualification can be appropriate for a relative within the third
degree of relationship even though that relative does not reside in the judge's
household in certain circumstances, such as when a relative is likely to be a
material witness.
Section: Duties Of Impartiality, Competence, And Diligence
Les avantages d'acheter des résumés chez Stuvia:
Qualité garantie par les avis des clients
Les clients de Stuvia ont évalués plus de 700 000 résumés. C'est comme ça que vous savez que vous achetez les meilleurs documents.
L’achat facile et rapide
Vous pouvez payer rapidement avec iDeal, carte de crédit ou Stuvia-crédit pour les résumés. Il n'y a pas d'adhésion nécessaire.
Focus sur l’essentiel
Vos camarades écrivent eux-mêmes les notes d’étude, c’est pourquoi les documents sont toujours fiables et à jour. Cela garantit que vous arrivez rapidement au coeur du matériel.
Foire aux questions
Qu'est-ce que j'obtiens en achetant ce document ?
Vous obtenez un PDF, disponible immédiatement après votre achat. Le document acheté est accessible à tout moment, n'importe où et indéfiniment via votre profil.
Garantie de remboursement : comment ça marche ?
Notre garantie de satisfaction garantit que vous trouverez toujours un document d'étude qui vous convient. Vous remplissez un formulaire et notre équipe du service client s'occupe du reste.
Auprès de qui est-ce que j'achète ce résumé ?
Stuvia est une place de marché. Alors, vous n'achetez donc pas ce document chez nous, mais auprès du vendeur EvaTee. Stuvia facilite les paiements au vendeur.
Est-ce que j'aurai un abonnement?
Non, vous n'achetez ce résumé que pour $24.99. Vous n'êtes lié à rien après votre achat.
Peut-on faire confiance à Stuvia ?
4.6 étoiles sur Google & Trustpilot (+1000 avis)
80364 résumés ont été vendus ces 30 derniers jours
Fondée en 2010, la référence pour acheter des résumés depuis déjà 14 ans
