Question 1

Clara Paralegal is taking some routine information from a new client (Mr. Deal) when Deal suddenly opens his briefcase and shows her a handgun. He says: "This is the gun I used to kill my wife. I'm on my way to my bank to hide it in a safe deposit box." Clara says: "That's not a very smart place to hide it. It's the first place the police usually look! Give it to me and I'll hide it some place where they will never look and, as I won't tell you where it is, you have plausible deniability." Clara has
A) committed an act of ex parte communication.
B) aided in the secreting or hiding of evidence and committed a crime.
C) acted within the course and scope of her job so long as she checks with her supervising lawyer.
D) acted within the course and scope of her job because the gun is attorney/client privileged.

Accepted Answer

Clara has aided in the secreting or hiding of evidence, which is a crime. She should immediately report Mr. Deal's confession and the existence of the gun to her supervising lawyer or law enforcement. By assisting in hiding the gun, Clara becomes an accessory to the crime and could face charges herself.

Question 2

Bronson Paralegal is writing a motion that will be filed with the state court. He has located a case that holds exactly the opposite of the point he is trying to make. In order to rectify what Bronson sees as a losing motion, Bronson simply quotes from the case's ruling and inserts the word "not" at the appropriate place. Now the quote stands for the proposition that Bronson needs. "Unless the judge reads very carefully, he will never notice this small insertion," thinks Bronson. Just to be sure his supervising attorney doesn't get into trouble, though, Bronson tells the attorney what the case really says. Which of the following is likely to happen next?
A) Bronson may be told to fix the sentence back to an accurate quote, even if it means losing the motion.
B) Bronson may be fired for attempting to mislead the court but, at the very least, he will be in alot of trouble.
C) Bronson may be demoted from doing legal research to organizing documents.
D) Bronson will be told to fix the sentence back to an accurate quote, he may be demoted or he may be fired for attempting to mislead the court

Accepted Answer

Bronson's actions constitute a serious ethical violation by attempting to mislead the court through the deliberate misquotation of legal authority. Such behavior could lead to severe consequences, including being instructed to correct the misrepresentation, facing demotion, or even termination of employment. Legal professionals are held to high standards of honesty and integrity, and Bronson's conduct falls well below these expectations.

Question 3

Cleo Paralegal has been trying to get Wayne King (bad guy) served with a complaint for two months. Wayne has been served before and is now the "King of Evasion." In order to find Wayne when he is not suspecting a process server, Cleo begins hanging out at a coffee shop near Wayne's sister's house. Cleo spreads around the idea that she is Wayne's "old girl friend from high school" who is looking to surprise Wayne. Cleo
A) is probably going to find Wayne and serve him and all will be well.
B) is probably guilty of suppression of evidence.
C) is probably guilty of spoliation of evidence.
D) is probably guilty of pretexting.

Accepted Answer

Cleo is using false pretenses to gain information about Wayne's whereabouts, which is a form of pretexting. While this may not be illegal in all circumstances, it is generally frowned upon in the legal profession and could potentially lead to disciplinary action. Additionally, if Wayne does end up being served based on the information obtained through pretexting, he may argue that the service is invalid due to the unethical behavior used to obtain his location.

Question 4

Attorney Evans lost a motion for a new trial. In his anger, he wrote a letter to the judge accusing him of making the adverse ruling based on religious bias because both the judge and opposing counsel are Jewish, and Evans is not. While appealing the judge's ruling, Evans wrote to the judge:" I feel that your Ruling was either the result of your incompetence in the matter or perhaps worse and reflected a Jewish bias in favor of the Kaplan firm whose actions were in my judgment inexcusable in this cause. If in fact it represents incompetence I will drop the matter but if it is a Jewish bias I will file a complaint under the Rules for Handling Complaints of Judicial Misconduct or Disability." Evans:
A) will be found to be incompetent to continue to practice law because his letter was discourteous, prejudicial to the administration of justice, and defamatory.
B) may be found to be incompetent to continue to practice law only if he loses his appeal.
C) cannot be found guilty of anything, or incompetent, because his words are protected by the First Amendment.
D) may be found to be rude, but nothing more.

Accepted Answer

Attorney Evans' letter is highly inappropriate and violates multiple ethical and professional standards. His accusations of religious bias are baseless and offensive, and his threat to file a complaint against the judge is an attempt to intimidate and harass the judge. Such behavior undermines the integrity of the legal profession and the administration of justice. Therefore, Evans may be found to be incompetent to practice law due to his discourteous, prejudicial, and defamatory letter.

Question 5

Apolonia Paralegal's father owns a golf and tennis pro shop at a local golf club. Apolonia's law firm typically gets sports-types gifts wholesale (through Apolonia's dad) and gives them to the local court personnel at Christmas. This practice
A) is fine so long as Apolonia's firm does not ask for anything special from the court personnel.
B) is fine so long as this is the custom and practice in that town, city or area.
C) is not a good idea because seeking to influence court personnel by giving them gifts is a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
D) is fine because gifts are standard practice for Christmas.

Accepted Answer

The Rules of Professional Conduct prohibit lawyers from seeking to influence court personnel by giving them gifts. This practice could be seen as an attempt to curry favor or influence decision-making, even if that is not the intent. It is best to avoid any appearance of impropriety, and instead find other ways to show appreciation to court personnel that do not involve gifts.

Question 6

In house paralegal, Dorothy, is asked by her company's personnel department if the old email backup harddrive, which is failing, can be erased and disposed of. As the personnel department has nothing to do with corporate dealings with shareholders or other people outside of the company, Dorothy does not see the harm in letting that old information go. She is
A) probably correct because the email are only pertinent to internal matters.
B) probably wrong because the personnel department's email might be pertinent to a case brought by a current or fomer employee against the corporation.
C) probably correct because there is never any need to retain email. They are all preserved by the senders, anyway.
D) probably wrong because all email must be retained by every corporation for all time.

Accepted Answer

The personnel department's emails could potentially be relevant to a lawsuit brought by a current or former employee, so it is important to properly retain and dispose of the email backup.

Question 7

While interviewing a potential witness, Xavier Paralegal suggested that the witness did not see a "green" car, but instead showed her pictures of blue and turquoise-colored cars of the same make and model as the car the witness told the police she had seen at the accident. By the end of the interview, the witness was pretty confused about what, exactly, she had seen. At Xavier's request, then, she signed a witness statement saying that she really did not remember what the car looked like, contradicting the statement she made to the police. Xavier
A) is guilty of witness tampering.
B) was fine when he showed pictures to the witness but should not have "suggested" that she did not see a green car.
C) has violated his duty to the legal system by confusing a witness who would otherwise have been able to shed valuable light on the truth.
D) is simply doing his best for his client by confusing this witness

Accepted Answer

The answer of While interviewing a potential witness, Xavier Paralegal...

Question 8

The plaintiff, Leandro Rizzuto, climbed a ladder manufactured by the named defendant, Ladders, Inc. while shopping at a Buy-It-All store. The ladder collapsed suddenly and the plaintiff fell to the floor, incurring serious physical injuries. The plaintiff filed a product liability action against Ladders and the defendant, Buy-It-All, alleging that the ladder had been manufactured and designed improperly, and had been sold without proper warnings. Thereafter, the plaintiff asked the defendants repeatedly to preserve the ladder and to afford him an opportunity to examine the ladder. The defendants' expert examined the ladder and concluded that it was not defective. The defendants thereafter destroyed the ladder, despite the fact that the plaintiff had never had an opportunity to inspect it. Plaintiff will bring a motion for
A) spoliation of evidence.
B) tortious interference with prospective business advantage.
C) suppression of evidence.
D) pretexting of evidence.

Accepted Answer

The defendants' destruction of the ladder despite repeated requests to preserve it constitutes spoliation of evidence, and the plaintiff may bring a motion to address this issue.

Question 9

The Law Firm of Ubber & Pratt received a very large invoice from Court Reporting Agency. Rather than pay the invoice, the firm filed a complaint against the agency hoping that the probability of a long and expensive law suit will frighten them into just forgetting about the invoice. In reality, Ubber & Pratt have no problem with Court Reporting Agency. This tactic
A) violates the rule against bringing a frivolous claim for the purpose of harassment.
B) is a perfectly legitimate and often used method of negotiating the price of services.
C) violates the rule against perpetuity.
D) is a little known method of catching the attention of service providers, and within the boundaries of the law.

Accepted Answer

Filing a complaint against a company without any real grounds, with the sole purpose of scaring them into forgetting about the invoice, is a clear violation of the rule against bringing a frivolous claim for the purpose of harassment. This could potentially lead to legal consequences for the firm.

Question 10

Percy Paralegal is, among other things, in charge of the thousands of documents for a multi-million dollar contract litigation case. Document #78690757 is missing, but Percy remembers exactly what it looked like. Rather than get in trouble for losing a document, Percy re-creates the document using his computer and the law firm printer/photocopier. Percy
A) has fabricated evidence only if he is asked to testify as to the authenticity of Document #78690757.
B) has done nothing wrong so long as the new replication of Document #78690757 is EXACTLY the same as the original.
C) has fabricated evidence even though he had no intent to perpetrate a fraud upon the court.
D) has only fabricated evidence if Document #78690757 will be admitted into evidence at trial.

Accepted Answer

Percy has recreated a document and presented it as if it were the original, which constitutes fabricating evidence. It does not matter whether he had intent to perpetrate a fraud upon the court or whether the document will be admitted into evidence at trial.

Question 11

Defendant Jonas was on trial for 1st degree manslaughter. The trial was 8 days long. The jury was then given instructions and went into the jury room to deliberate. Approximately two hours later, the jury sent a note out to the judge saying that they could not reach a verdict. After receiving the note, the judge met with the jury in a group and told them that they had not deliberated long enough, that they may be missing the importance of some evidence, or maybe were not looking at all of the evidence. After this meeting with the judge, the jury went back to deliberations and, five hours later returned a guilty verdict. The defendant
A) has an argument that the verdict should be overturned because of suppression of evidence.
B) has no legal arguments based on the information provided.
C) has an argument that the verdict should be overturned due to spoliation of evidence.
D) has an argument that the verdict should be overturned due to the ex parte communication between the judge and the jury.

Accepted Answer

The defendant has an argument that the verdict should be overturned due to the ex parte communication between the judge and the jury. The judge's meeting with the jury in a group could be seen as an inappropriate communication and may have influenced the jury's decision.

Quiz 8: The Duty of Diligent Representation

Apolonia Paralegal's father owns a golf and tennis pro shop at a local golf club. Apolonia's law firm typically gets sports-types gifts wholesale (through Apolonia's dad) and gives them to the local court personnel at Christmas. This practice