Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam Practice Test

Placing the disputed funds into a separate trust account to address the dispute ensures that the funds are preserved and managed appropriately until the rightful ownership is determined. This approach complies with professional responsibility rules by preventing commingling and safeguarding client property. Other options either allow potential misuse of funds or do not adequately protect the interests of all parties involved.

Declining external demands preserves independence and demonstrates that the judge’s decisions arise from the law rather than outside influence. Changing the schedule to accommodate an external request opens the door to undue influence. Publicly declaring compliance creates the appearance of subservience to non-judicial concerns.

Attorneys have a duty to serve when appointed if representation is feasible without substantial risk of inadequate performance or overwhelming burden. Personal preference or moderate scheduling conflicts do not justify turning away an appointment. Positioning acceptance on unrelated factors is not consistent with professional responsibilities.

Model Rule 4.1 prohibits knowingly making a false statement of material fact to a third person. In negotiations, statements about a party's willingness to compromise or its bargaining position are generally treated as permissible "puffery" and are not material facts. Therefore, the first statement-overstating the client's bottom-line demand-is typically allowed. The second statement invents an expert and a report that do not exist; that is a knowing misrepresentation of a material fact and violates Rule 4.1. Consequently, only the second statement breaches the rule. The other answer options are incorrect because they either treat permissible puffery as misconduct or fail to recognize the fabrication of evidence as impermissible.

Attorneys are permitted to participate in initiatives aimed at shaping policy, but they should not overlook potential harms to a client. The preferred approach respects both advocacy responsibilities and the need to keep clients sufficiently informed. The less effective options either deprive the client of important information, withdraw from services at the slightest sign of conflict, or prematurely end the attorney’s reform work without considering balanced solutions.

Professional rules prohibit efforts that attach a government official's favorable action to monetary or fundraising benefits. The best option acknowledges that a lawyer is obligated to avoid giving or facilitating gifts suggesting a quid pro quo or creating an appearance of impropriety. By declining to be part of a proposal that uses financial contributions to sway an official, the lawyer respects the ethical limits on influencing government authority. Other answers excuse or justify the fundraiser, overlooking the prohibition on exchanging financial favors for official decisions.

Ethics rules require prosecutors to disclose evidence that may indicate the defendant is not guilty. A prosecutor’s obligation is to seek justice, not merely to win. The option involving prompt disclosure follows this principle. Answers suggesting concealment or waiting for trial violate the ethical duty to ensure fairness and to provide exculpatory information in a timely manner.

Including claims that the attorney believes have a chance of success ensures that the claims are founded on a reasonable basis, fulfilling the obligation to present meritorious claims. The other options involve including claims without sufficient merit or proper assessment, which does not meet the required standard.

Government lawyers disclose information that challenges their case to maintain fairness. Withholding new lab data that undermines the basis for prosecution violates ethical rules. Prosecutors must reconsider the strength of the charges and share relevant information so the accused can prepare a defense.

The correct answer identifies that Attorney Johnson’s statement is misleading because she has not verified the availability of funds, which violates the duty of truthfulness in statements to others.

The highest court holds recognized authority to manage licensure and discipline of attorneys. Other bodies can investigate or recommend discipline, but the highest court issues the binding order. The legislature creates general laws but does not handle direct regulation or discipline of individual attorneys. The governor does not hold recognized authority to supervise attorney licensing matters. The bar association can recommend sanctions but does not impose a suspension with binding effect.

Lawyers are required to keep clients informed about developments that could significantly affect the client's interests. Information about a potential settlement is often considered an important option. The lawyer can advise the client regarding the advantages or disadvantages, but not disclosing the option entirely restricts the client’s choice. Refusing to pass along proposals because the lawyer deems them unappealing keeps clients from evaluating and deciding their own course of action.

Professional rules recommend that money entrusted by a client be kept apart from the attorney’s personal or operating accounts. A dedicated account prevents accidental or intentional commingling of client funds and ensures clear records. An attorney should not store the client’s money in a personal account, invest it for the attorney’s benefit, or use it to pay invoices unless the fees have been earned. A separate account aligns with the lawyer’s responsibility to safeguard client property and maintain accurate bookkeeping.

Financial arrangements demand scrutiny to preserve confidence in a judge’s impartiality. The first statement recognizes a modest payment but highlights the need to maintain independence. The second statement focuses on location but overlooks overall ethics considerations. The third statement presumes compensation itself shifts neutrality, ignoring cases where modest stipends do not compromise public trust.

The judge should recuse themselves from the case to prevent any appearance of bias or conflict of interest, thereby maintaining the integrity of the judicial process. Continuing to hear the case or delegating it without proper notification does not adequately address the potential for bias.

An attorney-client relationship can come into existence when a lawyer provides legal advice and undertakes activities on a client’s behalf. Leah took specific actions, indicating she was representing Chase and that Chase relied on her guidance. Other answers suggest that a fee agreement or payment is essential, which is not accurate under professional responsibility rules. A formal contract or payment is not required to establish the relationship.

Lawyers are expected to manage their workload effectively. The correct option reflects that missing the specified date stopped the client’s ability to proceed. Other responses either shift focus to different issues or suggest the attorney effectively handled the matter, which did not occur given the late filing.

The attorney should inform the court that the statute has been overturned and adjust their argument accordingly. This action ensures honesty and transparency, aligning with the duty of candor to the tribunal. Failing to disclose the change or continuing to rely on the invalidated statute would violate ethical obligations.

The best option establishes that a supervisory lawyer implements measures to guide compliance and intervenes when an issue is recognized. Proposing that the department head avoids responsibility overlooks the fundamental requirement of supervision. Suggesting that the department head personally manages all assignments incorrectly implies a more onerous obligation than what the rules require, which focus on systems and interventions when problems arise.

Reprimanding the attorney and requiring additional ethics training is appropriate for unintentional but unprofessional behavior. Suspension or disbarment would be excessive for non-malicious misconduct, and dismissing the complaint would not address the professionalism issues identified.