An attorney represented a plaintiff in a personal injury suit, and a certified paralegal was employed by the attorney and worked on the case. The case involved an automobile accident in which a car driven by the defendant collided with the plaintiff's car. The defendant's wife had been in the defendant's car and was a witness. The attorney did not like the attorney who represented the defendant. The plaintiff's attorney and the defendant's attorney had been opposing counsel on several other cases, and the plaintiff's attorney believed that the work of the defendant's attorney had been second rate (and not worth the $600 per hour he charged). To annoy the defendant's counsel, the plaintiff's attorney instructed her paralegal to include in the request for production of documents a request for any documents reflecting communications between the defendant's wife and a named third person. The attorney believed the wife and the third person were having an affair and thought the communications might discredit the wife at trial. Is the plaintiff's attorney subject to any disciplinary action?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Yes, because the discovery request is unfair to an opposing party. "A lawyer shall not . . . in a pretrial procedure, make a frivolous discovery request or fail to make reasonably diligent effort to comply with a legally proper discovery request by an opposing party." Model Rule 3.4(d). Answer A is the best choice because a frivolous discovery request is a violation of the Model Rule on fairness to opposing party and counsel. Answer B is not the best choice because, generally, unnecessary delay based on (only) one discovery request will not support a disciplinary action. Answer C is not the best choice because evidence that is unrelated to a claim or defense is not admissible. Answer D is not the best choice because it does not consider whether the request is frivolous.

An Attorney Represented a Plaintiff in a Personal Injury Suit