In Lawyer Disciplinary Board v. Markins, the court held that
A) there was no ethics violation because Markins secretly accessed only his wife's emails.
B) clients had waived client-attorney confidentiality by including confidential information in emails.
C) Markins should be suspended for 2 years because surreptitiously accessing attorney emails violated ethics rules.
D) Markins should be prosecuted rather than being disciplined under attorney ethics rules.
Correct Answer:
Verified
Q16: Contingency fees are ethical in which of
Q17: A lawyer must breach confidentiality in which
Q18: The prohibition against attorney advertising was first
Q19: The failure of a professional person to
Q20: A paralegal who discloses a client's privileged
Q21: In In re Wells, the court held
Q22: In In re Hawkins , the court
Q23: In In re Anonymous Member of the
Q24: When a longtime client comes to you,
Q25: In Disciplinary Counsel v. Owen, the court
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents