Deck 7: Competence and Negligence

Question 1

Peggy Paralegal has noticed that her supervising attorney often comes to work late, leaves early, and reeks of alcohol. This does not surprise Peggy because she understands that law is a very stressful profession, but she is concerned. Peggy is wondering whom she can turn to and where she can get her questions about alcohol dependency answered. Peggy's best response is

A) not worry about it. It's not her problem.
B) look for her state's Alcoholic Anonymous and ask them to approach her employer about his problem.
C) look for her state's LAP, lawyer assistance program, and talk to them about her options.
D) find a new job as quickly as possible.

Answer 1

C

Question 2

Maggie Rudin was accused of murdering her millionaire 4th husband. Because she was denied access to her husband's money, Rudin needed a pro bono lawyer. Attorney Amador agreed to take the case pro bono in exchange for the right to turn her story into a movie script. Rudin agreed. Each time Rudin met with Amador, Amador made sure the t.v. news media was there so that the public would get a picture of her as the wrongly accused grieving widow. Amador did not interview witnesses, but had all of the documents copied and placed into trial notebooks. Before trial, Amador took a month-long vacation and left Rudin's case with the public defender assisting on the case. Which of the following can be said of Amador?

A) Amador was negligent in the preparation of Rudin's defense only if she is convicted.
B) Amador was not negligent because everyone prepares for trial differently.
C) Amador was negligent in the preparation of Rudin's defense if his action/inaction fell below the standard of care of the reasonable lawyer under the circumstances
D) Amador was not negligent because he was part of a defense team and the rest of the team had an equal obligation to prepare for trial.

Answer 2

C

Question 3

Attorney Brite represented Martin in a personal injury case for injuries that she received when a kitchen cabinet in her apartment fell on her. The complaint that Brite filed on Martin's behalf named many defendants, including various subcontractors and others, some of whom later provided evidence that they should not have been named as defendants. Several of the defendants named in the complaint filed motions for summary judgment. Brite delegated responsibility for opposing those motions to a new associate in his office, Gresby. Gresby had minimal legal experience and never opposed a motion for summary judgment. Brite was aware of Gresby's inexperience, but he assigned the matter to Gresby nonetheless.
To respond to the summary judgment motions, Gresby needed to submit documents or affidavits on Martin's behalf that would show the court that there was a genuine issue of material fact requiring a trial. Rather than doing so, Gresby opposed the motions orally, relying solely on legal arguments. The trial court granted the defense motions. Brite

A) will not be found to be incompetent unless Martin loses her case.
B) should be found to be negligent for improper delegation and supervision AND filing a complaint against defendants without first doing enough background on the case to determine the proper defendants
C) should be found to be negligent for improper delegation and supervision of his associate.
D) will not be found to be incompetent because it was Gresby who wrote the losing summary judgment documents.

Answer 3

B

Question 4

Sarah has just been made a member of the bar and is going to open her own law office. You will be her first employee! What advice can you give her about professional liability insurance.

A) It would be a good idea to research state law to find out if professional liability insurance is mandatory in your state. She will need a different policy to insure the firm for bodily injury and property damage because professional liability insurance covers direct financial loss and expense to the legal professional that arise from claims of neglect, omissions or errors, but not intentional torts.
B) professional liability insurance does not cover bodily injury or property damage.
C) professional liability insurance covers direct financial loss and expense to the legal professional that arise from claims of neglect, omissions or errors, but not intentional torts.
D) some states require lawyers to have professional liability insurance (so we should go look that up.)

Question 5

Coty is a paralegal who works in the family law department for Biggy, Stan & Houston law firm. The firm has a policy that each paralegal and lawyer must do at least 100 hours of pro bono work but the firm typically takes on a big pro bono case that they can all work on together. This year, the case the firm took on involves antitrust litigation and it is pretty complex. Coty doesn't really understand the work that he is asked to do on the case but he isn't concerned because "it's just a pro bono case." As Coty's friend, you should

A) tell Coty that he is a fiduciary regardless of the pro bono status of the case, and so he must always act with complete loyalty and good faith toward every client.
B) keep your mouth closed. If Coty gets in trouble, that's his problem.
C) tell Coty that he's probably right but he should document his lack of concern in the file.
D) tell Coty that he is not responsible for working on the case because he is in the family law department.

Question 6

Paralegal Mara has been working for a plaintiff's personal injury firm for 4 years and is looking for a change. She's thinking about a job with a real estate firm, but she has no experience in that area. Options for Mara are

A) reading some real estate practice manuals and articles about the duties that paralegals have in that area of the law.
B) going back to school to take some courses in real estate and related topics.
C) taking some continuing legal education courses through her local paralegal or bar organization.
D) taking some courses at school, or through continuing education, and doing some independent reading in practice manuals and other professional publications.

Question 7

Attorney Resp is a criminal defense attorney who drinks heavily most nights. He represents a man who has been accused of burglarizing federal offices. Resp did some preliminary investigation on the case but has misplaced his notes. Additionally, in his regular morning stupor, he ordinarily forgets to perform simple tasks such as interviewing or subpoening witnesses. On the morning of trial, Resp approached the Assistant State's Attorney (ASA) handling the case about postponing the trial. The ASA told Resp he would oppose any request for a postponement. Resp informed the ASA that he needed the postponement because he was in a continuing trial before Judge Provost in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City and that he needed to be in that court at 10:45 that morning. Resp and the ASA then went before the judge for a hearing on Resp's request for a postponement. During that hearing, Resp stated two reasons for his request. The first was the absence of a defense witness who had not been subpoenaed by Resp. The other reason stated by Resp was that he had been instructed to report to a courtroom in Baltimore City at 10:45 to start a trial that had been carried over from the previous week. Based on Resp's representation, the judge agreed to postpone the trial.
When the judge called Judge Provost at the Circuit Court in Baltimore City, he discovered that Resp had lied about starting a trial there. Resp is referred to the state bar for disciplinary proceedings. A likely outcome will be:

A) Resp will be suspended from the practice of law until he can prove he is sober.
B) Resp will be disbarred for continuing drunkeness.
C) Resp will not be disciplined if this is the first little white lie he has told to a judge.
D) Resp will be referred to an alcohol treatment program as part of any discipline.

Question 8

Attorney Johnston's wife died last month. He is despondent and unable to concentrate on his work. He often finds the day has passed by and he has not accomplished anything on behalf of his many clients. Next week he will go to court to argue a motion for which he will be completely unprepared. Johnston

A) may be found to be incompetent because his depression is keeping him from being thorough and properly preparing for the upcoming motion.
B) may not be found to be incompetent because such a finding requires some element of intent.
C) may be found to be incompetent only if he has a pattern of incompetence
D) may be found to be incompetent only if his depression causes him to over indulge in alcohol or drugs.

Question 9

Attorney Anter is a criminal defense lawyer. In the case of Rio, Anter failed to adequately prepare for the case, barely spoke to his client until the trial got under way and failed to properly cross-examine prosecution witnesses. According to the judge who heard the case, Anter should not have put Rio on the witness stand because Rio admitted being a member of a gang which probably helped the jury decide that he was guilty of being involved in a drive-by shooting. The judge set aside the jury's verdict. Anter:

A) may be guilty of negligence depending upon the standard of competence in his community.
B) is guilty of negligence for failure to represent Rio competently if his action/inaction fell below the standard of care of the reasonable lawyer under the circumstances.
C) is not guilty of negligence because the judge set aside the jury's verdict.
D) is guilty of negligence unless he refunds the money he took from the client's family.

Question 10

Attorney Arken does not handle family law matters so when one of his clients (Mrs. Gold) asks for an attorney to handle her divorce, Arken recommended Sandy Lawyer, a fellow Arken new in high school. Sandy is a terrific guy and Mrs. Gold liked him enormously. Sandy, however, enjoys surfing more than working and, as a result, completely bungled Mrs. Gold's divorce causing her to lose her rights to much of her husband's wealth. Mrs. Gold filed a complaint against Arken for "negligent referral." The likely outcome of this complaint is

A) that it will go to trial and the outcome will depend upon exactly what Arken told Mrs. Gold about Sandy's competence.
B) that it will be dismissed before trial because there is no cause of action that makes Arken a guaranty of Sandy's competence.
C) that it will go to trial and the outcome will depend upon Mrs. Gold's proof that Arken's recommendation was the actual and proximate cause of her harm.
D) that it will go to trial and the outcome will depend on the amount of harm Mrs. Gold suffered from Sandy's incompetence.