Duties To the Court Self-Quiz
Say your client,
Kerry Fried Chicken, is suing a meat distributor for a breach of contract.
The parties had reached an agreement regarding the sale of a number of
tons of chicken meat. Your client is unhappy with the meat delivered.
He wants you to argue that the meat delivered was clearly for boiling
and stewing chickens, not for frying, and that the defendant breached
the contract knowing that the chickens he delivered were unusable. Would
it be frivolous to make such an argument?
|
You represent
Chop and Shop, a big supermarket defending itself in a personal injury
suit brought by one of its customers. The customer testifies that he was
walking down the “pets” aisle at the store when suddenly a
50-pound bag of dog food fell off a shelf and knocked him down. The customer
claims his skull was fractured as a result of your client’s negligence.
In cross-examination, you try to elicit from the customer that he is a
card-carrying member of the Americans for Nazis. The court sustains an
objection to this line of questioning, but you press on, hoping to sway
the jury’s opinion with this information. Are you subject to discipline?
|
You represent
Caravaggio in a murder defense – he’s been accused of killing
Vermeer with a meat cleaver. Late in the trial you realize Caravaggio
perjured himself. You tell Caravaggio he has to correct the record to
reflect the truth. He refuses. You want to withdraw but the court won’t
grant you leave to do so, this late in the trial. Do you tell the court
about the perjury?
|
Again, you
are representing Caravaggio in his defense at a murder trial. Caravaggio
wants to testify. While you question Caravaggio on the stand, you stammer
a bit. You’re not sure, but you think he might be lying to the jury
about the death of Vermeer. Do you tell the court about his possible perjury?
|
You represent
Snoopy Dogg in his invasion of privacy suit against Kew Tipp. The jury
finds for Snoopy and the court enters the verdict, ending the trial. A
week later at a raucous celebratory dinner, Snoopy tells you he lied before
and during the trial – his evidence was falsified. You are shocked
and worry for your own career. You’re not sure whether you should
go to the judge on your case and disclose what you just learned from Snoopy
himself. Do you tell the court?
|
You’re
the lawyer for the plaintiff, Vlad N. Bokoff, who is suing his publisher
for breach of an oral contract. You call to the stand a witness, Vera
(a friend of Vlad) who said during trial preparations that she heard the
defendant publisher agree to a million dollar deal with Vlad. Vera shocks
you when she shows the jury a memo she claimed to have written at the
time of the contract negotiations. You are positively sure the memo is
a fraud and that Vera is lying. Must you interrupt Vera and try to get
her to recant before telling the court about her lie?
|
You are writing
a brief to the New York Court of Appeals on behalf of your client, Sam
Swap, the defendant in an online song-swapping case. In looking for cases
to cite as precedent for your argument against the plaintiff, a powerful
multinational corporation, you come across an old court ruling from the
New Jersey Court of Appeals that contradicts your argument. Must you cite
this holding in your brief, or risk discipline?
|
You represent
Tom Tiepolo, plaintiff in a personal injury suit against Francis Fragonard.
Tiepolo broke his leg in a car crash caused by Fragonard, who fell asleep
at the wheel coming home late from a Shriner’s meeting. You’re
negotiating with Fragonard’s attorney, Al Einstein, for a settlement.
Einstein apparently handles hundreds of these cases at the same time and
messes up facts related in a police report of the accident. The failure
to point out these facts leaves Einstein with little ammunition in his
negotiations on behalf of Fragonard. You realize right away that Einstein
has either misread the police reports, or simply forgot what he read.
You keep your mouth closed, figuring it’s not your obligation to
correct the opposition’s mistake. Have you violated an ethical duty
of candor?
|
Attorney Ike
Bashevis asks your client, Ad Loos, a question about his health insurance
coverage during a deposition. (A deposition is an interview given under
oath in which information is elicited for purposes of discovery in litigation).
You think this question is absolutely unnecessary. You interrupt Attorney
Bashevis and tell Ad Loos he doesn’t have to answer the question.
A few days later, your assistant comes across a rule of evidence that
changes your view of the health insurance question, making the question
relevant to the opposition’s case. Even though the deposition has
ended, must you reveal to the opposition what you have learned?
|
Your client,
famous boxer Micah Tiesohn, hires you to represent him in the sale of
one of his fabulously expensive vintage automobiles. You’re amazed
when you realize the potential bluebook value of Tiesohn’s little
two-seater sports car is as much as your 4-bedroom home. The buyer’s
attorney requests that you obtain a mechanic’s report on the state
of the car. You do so. You and Micah are very disappointed to find that
in the mechanic’s opinion, the car is worth a whole lot less than
you originally thought. When negotiations begin, you’re very surprised
that the buyer’s attorney offers the bluebook value of a “mint”
auto instead of one that’s in “good” condition. You
realize the buyer’s attorney or the buyer might have overlooked
the mechanic’s opinion. Should you point this out to the other attorney?
|
Again you
represent famous boxer Micah Tiesohn, this time in helping him contract
with a public relations professional, Paul Roberts. Tiesohn wants to enter
into an agreement whereby in return for public relations services, Roberts
will earn a percentage of Tiesohn’s purse in his next fight with
Elijah Holyman. You draft a contract, and Roberts’s attorney sends
it back to you after making some changes. You realize in looking over
the edits that Roberts’s attorney miscalculated the percentages
for fees owed to Roberts. You nonetheless say nothing, get Tiesohn to
sign, and return the contract to Roberts for his signature. Have you breached
an ethical duty?
|
You represent
Jane Smith in an ex parte domestic violence hearing. Jane wants you to
help her get a temporary restraining order against her husband. Jane requests
that you do not answer a question on a court form asking whether the defendant
is in possession of any weapons. Jane does not want the court to know
that her husband, a convicted felon, is in possession of a shotgun. She
wants to keep her husband away from the house but is afraid that if he
is arrested for unlawful weapons possession, he will never get out of
jail. Since the goal your client wants you to achieve is obtaining the
restraining order, and not an arrest of her husband, do you omit the answer
to this question on the form out of allegiance to Jane?
|
As a tax attorney,
you have dedicated much of your career to discovering loopholes in the
law to help your clients minimize their tax liabilities. You’ve
earned the nickname “Lawyer Loop” by colleagues, and your
reputation spreads among clients, making your office rather popular. One
day, a client seeks your advice on how to minimize state tax liability.
You study the client’s essential information, and fail to see any
loopholes. The client becomes angry, and his face turns so red he looks
like a different character. You ask some questions about the client’s
family, and find out he has a brother in an adjoining state, who he visits
quite often. You tell your client you’ll vouch for his residency
in this adjoining state, where taxes are lower. You tell the client he
could claim he’s been a tenant of his brother for over a year. Are
you subject to discipline?
|
You represent
the Inbread Corp. in its suit for contractual interference against Neofight,
Inc. In discovery, you request records of every contract Neofight and
its subsidiaries have entered into in the last 50 years. Neofight is a
huge multinational conglomerate with holdings vast and numerous. Nonetheless,
you reason it is your right in discovery to access all the information
you deem relevant to proving your case. Are you subject to discipline?
|
Your client,
Leo Lyon, is being sued by his ex-wife, Liza Vanilli, who claims Leo purposefully
ran over her foot with his big blue SUV when he saw her on the corner
of Broadway and 56th. Liza’s foot was badly broken in the incident.
In her complaint, Liza correctly alleges that Leo lives in Scarsdale,
New York and drives a big blue SUV. You think issuing a general denial
as to all of Liza’s allegations would be proper in advocating zealously
on behalf of Leo. Are you subject to discipline for doing so?
|
©2003 - 2024 National Paralegal College