MPRE

MPRE Practice Test

Attorney Jack is defending Datatec Corporation in an employment discrimination lawsuit brought by Attorney Enrique
on behalf of the plaintiffs. Wayne works for Datatec, but he is not a shareholder or an officer of the company, and he
is not a party to the litigation. Wayne is in charge of Datatec’s Personnel Department, and he is in responsibility of
ensuring that the company’s recruiting processes adhere to anti-discrimination regulations. Because Wayne is in poor
health, Jack scheduled Wayne’s deposition as a precaution in case he passes away before the trial. Enrique had lunch
with Wayne many days before the deposition without asking Jack’s permission or even alerting him, and during that
time Enrique pressed Wayne for information pertinent to the lawsuit. When Jack found out what had transpired, he
called Enrique and referred to him as a slimy, mud-sucking jerk. Which of the following statements is the closest to
the truth?

A) Enrique faces disciplinary action since he should not have discussed the case with Wallner without Jack’s permission.

B) Enrique faces disciplinary action after speaking with a deposition witness regarding the case’s subject matter before the deposition.

C) Enrique responded in a proper manner.

D) Jack responded in a proper manner.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
The correct answer:
Enrique faces disciplinary action since he should not have discussed the case with Wallner without Jack’s permission.

In a civil action, Judge Kara decided in favor of Plaintiff, ordering Defendant to pay Plaintiff $50,000 in damages.
Since then, Josephine has resigned from the bench. The defendant has refused to pay the $50,000 award, claiming that
the verdict was acquired unfairly. Defendant approaches Kara, who is now a solo practitioner, and asks if she will
represent him. If Kara represents Defendant, will she face disciplinary action?

A) No, since Kara isn’t on the bench anymore.

B) Because Kara was a judge at the time, she made a decision in this case.

C) No, unless Kara was a victim of fraud at the time of the original verdict.

D) Former judges are prohibited from practicing law in private practice.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
The correct answer:
Because Kara was a judge at the time, she made a decision in this case.

Attorney Arman has hired Jessica, a third-year law student in the area, to work as his clerk. Jessica does not have a license
under any state law or court rule that authorizes third-year law students to practice law under the supervision of a
professional attorney. Jessica is required to complete the following tasks by Arman:
I. Create a release form for personal injury plaintiffs to sign once their cases are resolved.
(Arman has the plaintiffs sign the documents himself.)
II. Interview accident witnesses and have them sign Jessica’s written interview transcript.
III. Reach out to insurance company representatives to reach a settlement agreement before filing a lawsuit.
Which, if any, of the above has Arman been disciplined for?

A) III

B) I.

C) II. and III

D) I. and II

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
The correct answer:
Reach out to insurance company representatives to reach a settlement agreement before filing a lawsuit.

A prosecutor who had graduated from law school two years prior ran for a position as a state trial court judge. Trial court judges
are chosen in nonparti-san elections in that state. A famous local attorney was questioned by a newspaper reporter and gave his
basic opinions of each contender, despite the fact that he had done no research into the individuals’ histories or qualifications.
“It takes many years of experience to develop the wisdom necessary to serve as a judge,” the attorney remarked when asked
about the prosecutor. I don’t think this prosecutor is ready to be a judge because he’s just been practicing for two years.”
Is the lawyer facing any disciplinary action?

A) No, since the First Amendment protects lawyers from disciplinary action if they make statements that cast doubt on the integrity of judges.

B) Yes, because the lawyer publicly questioned the qualifications of a judicial nominee.

C) Because the attorney failed to do a reasonable investigation into whether the prosecutor was competent to serve as a judge, the answer is yes.

D) No, because the attorney gave an honest and open view about a candidate for judicial office’s professional fitness.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
The correct answer:
No, because the attorney gave an honest and open view about a candidate for judicial office’s professional fitness.

For almost ten years, Attorney Jackson and his sister, Amara, ran a legal firm as a partnership. Amara then decided to run for the
position of judge. She was successful in her efforts, and she was sworn in as one of the district court’s 15 sitting judges.
According to state venue regulations, Jackson must file at least 90% of the cases he normally handles in district court. Is it
appropriate for Jackson to continue handling these cases and appear in district court?

A) Yes, unless Bob indicates that because his sister is a judge, his clients will be given unfair advantages.

B) No, since a lawyer should not appear in a district court where one of the judges is a close relative.

C) Yes, unless there is an objection from the opposite side.

D) No, because it gives the impression of impropriety.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
The correct answer:
Yes, unless Bob indicates that because his sister is a judge, his clients will be given unfair advantages.

Eve was recently elected to the Circuit Court as a Judge. She’ll be working in the Probate Division. Eve was a partner
in the legal firm J & J before being appointed to the bench. Eve filed a number of regular, uncontested probate
motions during her last week at the business. Eve had no idea she’d be assigned to the Probate Division at the time. The
Circuit Court uses a lottery system of random assignment to send matters to her courtroom, and these ordinary probate
motions have been assigned to her courtroom. Is it appropriate for Eve to make a decision on these motions?

A) Jillian has a conflict of interest, so no.

B) Yes, if reassignment would cause an undue amount of time to pass.

C) They are routine and uncontested, so yes.

D) No, because judges may never take part in cases involving their old legal practice.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
The correct answer:
Jillian has a conflict of interest, so no.

A lawsuit was assigned to a state trial court judge to invalidate a testamentary trust for violating the rule against perpetuities.
The judge had little prior expertise with estate problems and did not find the parties’ briefs to be useful. The court consulted
another trial judge with substantial knowledge in estate planning without notifying the parties about the key parts of the rule.
During the consultation, the judge took care not to identify the parties or receive any factual information that was not part of
the record. The judge then made a personal decision. She didn’t tell the parties about her meeting with the other judge, and
she didn’t give them the chance to object or respond. Was the judge’s behavior appropriate?

A) Yes, because the case was decided by the judge personally.

B) No, because the judge didn’t tell the parties about her meeting with the other judge and didn’t give them the chance to object or comment.

C) Because the judge did not identify the parties, yes.

D) No, because the judge failed to notify the parties that she intended to consult with the other judge ex parte on the topic.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
The correct answer:
Yes, because the case was decided by the judge personally

In a personal injury case, an attorney sued Giant Company on behalf of a client. Conglomerate purchased Giant Company
during the protracted litigation that followed. Conglomerate was already represented by the attorney before a federal
administrative agency in a regulatory compliance problem. Will the attorney have the opportunity to resign from one of
the representations to prevent the conflict, assuming this development was unexpected at the commencement of defending
the client against Giant Company?

A) Yes, however the attorney must seek court clearance if necessary, take precautions to limit harm to clients, and continue
to preserve the client’s confidences from whom the lawyer has withdrawn counsel.

B) No, since under the Supremacy Clause, the federal administrative matter would preempt state tort law.

C) Yes, because one case is in state court and the other is a separate federal administrative procedure.

D) No, if a conflict occurs after representation has begun, the lawyer must typically withdraw from both clients’ representation
unless each client’s informed consent has been secured at the commencement of the representation.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
The correct answer:
Yes, however the attorney must seek court clearance if necessary, take precautions to limit harm to clients, and continue
to preserve the client’s confidences from whom the lawyer has withdrawn counsel.

A lawyer in a five-lawyer firm discovered that one of her partners had charged a client for personal expenses while falsely
claiming that the expenses were related to the client’s representation. The partner quit after being presented with evidence
of the deception. The attorney informed the client of the scam and instructed the law firm’s billing staff to reimburse the
client for the bogus costs. The attorney questioned if the client wanted the disciplinary authority to know about the partner’s
behavior. The client did not oppose to the disclosure, but the lawyer made the final decision. Is it mandatory for the attorney to
report the partner’s behavior to the disciplinary authority?

A) Yes, because the partner’s conduct aroused serious doubts about his or her honesty, integrity, or qualification as a lawyer.

B) Yes, because lawyers are required to report all infractions of professional conduct standards to the appropriate disciplinary authorities.

C) No, because the attorney owes the partner an ongoing fiduciary duty with regard to events that transpired during their partnership.

D) No, because the attorney acted quickly to correct any harm caused to the client by the partner’s actions.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
The correct answer:
Yes, because the partner’s conduct aroused serious doubts about his or her honesty, integrity, or qualification as a lawyer

In a contentious divorce case involving property division and child custody, the woman was represented by an attorney.
The husband, through his lawyer, presented a settlement offer after one day of trial. The proposed settlement required
the wife’s attorney to promise not to represent her in any subsequent case initiated by either party to modify the client
and former partner’s relationship.The attorney concluded that revealing the former partner’s perjury would be detrimental
to the client’s best interests because the court would draw unfavourable judgments about the client based on the former
partner’s behavior. As a result, the attorney failed to inform the court of the former partner’s earlier perjury.
Was the lawyer’s behavior appropriate?

A) No, because the lawyer was aware that his former partner had committed a fraud on a tribunal.

B) Yes, since the attorney believed that disclosing the information would be harmful to the client’s interests.

C) No, because the previous perjury information was not privileged.

D) Yes, because neither the client nor the lawyer had been involved in the previous case in any manner.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
The correct answer:
Yes, because neither the client nor the lawyer had been involved in the previous case in any manner.

In State First, Anton is a member of the bar, and in State Two, he is also a stockbroker. Anton intentionally submitted a
falsified financial statement in his application for renewal of his stockbroker’s license in State Second. Is Anton facing
disciplinary action in State First as a result of this?

A) No, because his actions were not in accordance with State First.

B) Yes, but only if he is convicted of a crime in State Number Two first.

C) Yes, because his behaviors are based on deception or lying.

D) No, because he wasn’t acting in the capacity of an attorney.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
The correct answer:
Yes, because his behaviors are based on deception or lying.

Attorney wants to make it as simple as possible for her clients to pay her fees. Which of the following would be appropriate for the position of Attorney? (Clonazepam)
I. Accept bank credit cards as a form of payment for legal expenses.
II. Arrange for clients to secure bank loans in order to pay for legal bills.
III. If a case is particularly fascinating, ask that the client provide the Attorney publicity rights to the case as part of the fee.

A) Neither I, II, nor III

B) I and II

C) II

D) I, II, and III

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
The correct answer:
I and II

An attorney is a member of the board of directors of a corporation and serves as its lawyer. Which of the following statements about this circumstance is correct?

A) When the attorney is present as a director, he must have the ultimate say on board decisions, because the attorney bears responsibility for the decisions in the form of possible legal malpractice liability, which does not apply to the other directors who are not attorneys.

B) Because the responsibilities of the two roles may conflict, such as when the attorney must advise the corporation on matters involving the actions of the directors, the attorney is subject to discipline, and there is always a material risk that the dual role will compromise the lawyer’s independence of professional judgement.

C) The attorney must inform the other board members that, in some cases, matters discussed at board meetings while the attorney is present as a fellow director will not be protected by the attorney-client privilege in later litigation; and that conflict of interest considerations may require the attorney to recuse himself or decline representation.

D) Because there is always a material risk that the dual role will compromise the lawyer’s independence of professional judgment, the attorney must limit his legal representation of the corporation to transactional and regulatory matters and cannot represent the corporation in litigation against adverse parties.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
The correct answer:
The attorney must inform the other board members that, in some cases, matters discussed at board meetings while the attorney
is present as a fellow director will not be protected by the attorney-client privilege in later litigation; and that conflict of interest
considerations may require the attorney to recuse himself or decline representation.

An attorney, a venture financier, and a land developer came together to form a company to build a new retail mall. Their agreement divides ownership shares based on the appraised value of the venture capitalist’s land, which he is contributing to this endeavor, and the worth of the venture capitalist’s land, which he is contributing to this venture.
the market value of the developer’s design and construction work, as well as the attorney’s usual fees for time spent on the formation
As corporate counsel, I continue to represent the company. As a venture capitalist and a developer, the attorney was already representing both parties.
In unrelated cases, he represents his clients. If the attorney accomplishes the others, which of the following is NOT an obligation of the attorney in this situation?

A) The attorney must notify the developer and venture capitalist in writing that they should seek independent legal opinion on the transaction and allow them time to do so.

B) The attorney must fully disclose in writing to the developer and venture investor all provisions of the development company ownership agreement in language they understand, and the terms of the agreement must be objectively fair and reasonable to the two clients.

C) The venture capitalist and the developer give written informed assent to the transaction’s conditions and the attorney’s participation in the transaction, including whether the attorney is representing them.

D) To avoid conflicts of interest, the attorney must stop representing the venture capitalist and the developer on other matters until the corporation is formed.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
The correct answer:
To avoid conflicts of interest, the attorney must stop representing the venture capitalist and the developer on other
matters until the corporation is formed.

At the outset of defending a plaintiff in a personal injury case, an attorney obtained “litigation expense protection”
insurance.When the attorney was successful in recovering monies for the client through a settlement or a positive
trial verdict, the attorney suggested that the insurance premium be reimbursed from the judgment or settlement funds.
As part of the representation agreement, the attorney disclosed the amount of the insurance to the client. Was it legal for
an attorney to incorporate a clause in a client’s fee agreement that allowed the attorney to obtain litigation cost protection
insurance and required recovery of the insurance premium from the client’s assets in the event of a favorable trial decision
or agreement?

A) Yes, if the lawyer fully explains to the client what litigation cost protection insurance is, why the lawyer believes a litigation cost protection policy will serve the client’s best interests, that the client should seek independent legal counsel regarding the arrangement, and that other lawyers may advance the client’s interests.

B) No, lawyer may not include in a client’s fee agreement a provision allowing the lawyer’s purchase of litigation cost protection
insurance and requiring reimbursement of the insurance premium from the client’s funds in the event of a settlement or
favorable trial verdict

C) Yes, because the Model Rules do not pretend to control legal malpractice insurance, which is governed by state law.

D) No, because in this circumstance, the client and the lawyer have distinct cost-benefit estimates.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
Correct Answer:
Yes, if the lawyer fully explains to the client what litigation cost protection insurance is, why the lawyer believes a litigation cost protection policy will serve the
client’s best interests, that the client should seek independent legal counsel regarding the arrangement, and that other lawyers may advance the client’s interests.

The judge is presiding over a case in which the key issue is a complex matter of commercial law. Judge believes she requires extra legal counsel because the lawyers have not presented the case to her satisfaction. Attorney, Judge’s previous law firm partner, is a specialist in the field of law in question. The lawyer is uninterested in the case. Is it proper for a judge to seek legal advice?

A) No, unless all parties in the matter agree in writing to the Judge consulting with the Attorney.

B) Yes, if the Judge deems that the counsel of an attorney is required to serve the interests of justice.

C) No, unless the Judge informs the parties of the identity of the Attorney and the substance of the Attorney’s advise and requests their reply.

D) Yes, because Attorney has no vested interest in the outcome of the case.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
Correct Answer:
A) No, unless the Judge informs the parties of the identity of the Attorney and the substance of the Attorney’s advise and requests their reply.

In order to save money, a husband and wife decide to divorce and agree to share the same lawyer. They each hire an
attorney to represent them in Family Court as they seek to end their marriage. The attorney argues that there is an
evident conflict of interest here, but the husband and wife refuse to accept and sign informed consent forms waiving
the conflict and their rights to pursue any future claims relating to it. The couple has never had children and has always
had separate bank accounts. Each person bought their own car with money from their own bank account, and the title
is in only one person’s name. They share a flat with a lease that is about to expire, so there is no real property to divide.
Is it appropriate for the divorce attorney to represent both parties?

A) No, because in divorce cases, contingent fees are not allowed, and the husband and wife’s primary reason in sharing a lawyer was to save money.

B No, because the representation entails one client asserting a claim against another client represented by the lawyer in the same litigation or other procedure before a tribunal.

C) Yes, because there appear to be no assets in dispute based on these facts, so the possible conflict of interest would have no influence on their argument.

D) Yes, because both clients agreed in writing, dual representation is legal, and the attorney has a reasonable belief that he would be able to give competent and conscientious representation to both of the impacted clients.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
Correct Answer:
No, because the representation entails one client asserting a claim against another client represented by the lawyer in the same litigation or other procedure before a tribunal.

A customer owns a partnership share in a closely held corporation, and the other partners vote to force the client out of the firm through an involuntary buy-out. Although the client is clearly dissatisfied, the partnership agreement expressly allows for involuntary buyouts by a majority vote of the other shareholders. The customer then employs an attorney to represent him in the buyout transaction, analyze the required documents, and provide legal advice. At this time, no legal action is being considered.The attorney’s sister is also a lawyer in that city, working for a different company, and she represents the partnership’s other stockholders. Despite this, the attorney did not reveal that her sister represented the other partners because she and her sister are not close and rarely talk, and the matter is unlikely to get to court. Is the attorney, or any of her firm’s other lawyers, subject to disqualification in this case?

A) No, as long as both sisters offer written informed consent and each feels she will be able to represent her client competently and diligently.

B) No, because the attorney and her sister aren’t close enough to pose a significant danger of sharing sensitive information, and the situation was unlikely to lead to litigation.

C) Disqualification would apply to the attorney, but not to the other lawyers in her company.

D) Because the client did not provide written informed permission, the attorney and her firm would be disqualified.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
Correct Answer:
Disqualification would apply to the attorney, but not to the other lawyers in her company

The couple wanted to hire a certain attorney to draft their wills. The husband spoke with the attorney secretly over
the phone before the formalities of representation were finalized, and said that he had been having an affair and that
his girlfriend might be pregnant. Husband forbids the attorney from informing the Wife. The attorney then understands
that there could be potential conflicts of interest between husband and wife regarding wills, asset distribution, prospective
challenges to the will by non-married children, and potential child support claims against the Husband’s estate. Is it appropriate
for the attorney to represent the Husband and Wife in the preparation of their wills?

A) Yes, because this is a transactional affair rather than a lawsuit with the potential for adverse claims.

B) Yes, if both parties give written approval after being warned about the potential conflicts that can arise when dual representation is used.

C) No, because preparing a will for Husband in such circumstances would be inappropriate.

D) No, because the attorney cannot breach Husband’s duty of confidence, which would be required to gain Wife’s informed permission.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
Correct Answer:
No, because the attorney cannot breach Husband’s duty of confidence, which would be required to gain Wife’s informed permission.

For many clients, a skilled attorney handles claims against banks for difficulties involving banks’ failure to investigate
reports of fraud or unauthorized use of bank cards in a timely manner. The majority of an attorney’s work consists
of mailing demand letters, and the majority of cases never result in a lawsuit being filed. The attorney is hired by Bank,
a small local bank, to handle a lawsuit against a customer for non-payment of a loan. The lawyer has never represented
a client in a case against Bank. Nonetheless, the attorney incorporates a condition in his retainer agreement with the
Bank that waives any future conflicts involving the attorney representing clients against the Bank over concerns such
as failure to investigate reports of fraud or illegal use of bank cards. Is the lawyer’s behavior appropriate?

A) Attorneys are unable to add disclaimers of future conflicts in contracts involving financial claims.

B) Yes, attorneys can incorporate future conflict waivers as long as their clients are aware of the waiver.

C) Yes, attorneys can insert waiver clauses in their contracts for specific future conflicts if their clients are aware of the waiver and the contract specifies the types of future representations that may emerge.

D) No, attorneys cannot insert future conflict waivers in contracts.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
Correct Answer:
Yes, attorneys can insert waiver clauses in their contracts for specific future conflicts if their clients are aware of the waiver and the contract specifies the types of future representations that may emerge.

Three co-founders of a successful startup business retain the services of an attorney to assist them in reorganizing
their company’s finances. The attorney tries to reconcile possibly conflicting interests by focusing on the parties’
common interests. By agreeing to represent all of the parties as clients at the same time, the attorney commits to
adapt the client relationship in a friendly and mutually beneficial manner. The clients each sign a document
acknowledging the potential conflicts of interest. Is it ethical for an attorney to represent three clients in a negotiated
deal who may have competing interests?

A) No, because conflicts of interest in a negotiation environment are unconsentable, as no reasonable lawyer would
believe that the conflict would not materially impede his capacity to represent both sides; this is particularly true
in the case of collective bargaining in the workplace.

B) Yes, where the clients’ interests are mostly aligned, even if there are minor differences in interest, joint representation
is acceptable so that the attorney can pursue an agreeable and mutually beneficial solution.

C) Yes, because conflicts of interest do not exist outside of the litigation context, and the parties here aren’t litigating
and don’t expect to litigate, but are instead paying the attorney to facilitate negotiations on a matter where the two
sides aren’t that far apart.

D) No, because the parties’ interests are diametrically opposed, and a lawyer is prohibited from attempting to build
or alter a friendly and mutually beneficial relationship between clients.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
Correct Answer:
Yes, where the clients’ interests are mostly aligned, even if there are minor differences in interest, joint representation
is acceptable so that the attorney can pursue an agreeable and mutually beneficial solution.

A particular attorney helped a client get a favorable outcome in his or her case, and the client was appreciative.
As a holiday gift, the client sent the attorney a gift basket filled with high-quality fresh fruit, sample-size jars of
gourmet fruit preserves, and a few other goodies. The client paid $50 for the gift basket. Is it appropriate for the
attorney to accept this present, or does he or she have to decline it?

A) Yes, a lawyer will take a basic gift, such as a holiday present or a sign of appreciation.

B) No, because the lawyer’s whole pay for getting a good outcome should have been included in the initial retainer
agreement and its fee schedule, therefore any additional compensation or transfers from a client to a lawyer are
an unwritten alteration of the retainer agreement.

C) Yes, because there are no restrictions on lawyers receiving uninvited gifts from clients if they do not solicit the present.

D) No, unless the lawyer or other recipient of the gift is a related of the client, a lawyer may not take any major gift from a client.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
Correct Answer:
Yes, a lawyer will take a basic gift, such as a holiday present or a sign of appreciation.

A jury found a man guilty of murder and condemned him to death. His trial lawyer was underwhelming, and there
were issues that could be raised in ineffective assistance of counsel appeal. The defendant hired a separate attorney
from the same firm as his trial lawyer for his appeal; one of the firm’s lawyers handled trials, while the other handled
appeals. Can this appeal be handled by an appellate attorney from the same small firm as the trial lawyer?

A) Yes, since if the appellate attorney’s own behavior is not under question, there is no conflict of interest.

B) If the client agrees to the potential conflict of interest, then yes.

C) No, because a firm that loses a death penalty case at trial is ineligible to handle the appeal, which could mean the
difference between life and death for the client.

D) No, because, under the legal threshold for ineffective assistance of counsel, the attorney could be forced to trash
his own colleague’s representation as being unreasonably poor.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
Correct Answer:
No, because, under the legal threshold for ineffective assistance of counsel, the attorney could be forced to trash
his own colleague’s representation as being unreasonably poor.

While in private practice, an Assistant District Attorney who recently joined a county prosecutor’s office defended a
defendant at a preliminary hearing in a pending criminal case. How can the prosecutor’s office proceed with the
prosecution of the same defendant now that this attorney has joined the office?

A) For the purposes of lawyer conflicts of interest, the prosecutor’s office must either drop the charges or refer the case to federal prosecutors at the U.S. Attorney’s office, who constitute another sovereign or jurisdiction.

B) Because there is an exception in the conflict of interest regulations for prosecutors, the new attorney, or any other
lawyer in the prosecutor’s office, could pursue the case.

C) Either employ a special prosecutor for the case, borrow a prosecutor from another jurisdiction, or put in place
efficient screening methods to keep the new attorney out of the case.

D) The prosecutor’s office can’t charge the defendant with the same crime again (it has to withdraw the charges), but
it can charge him with different crimes in the future.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
Correct Answer:
Either employ a special prosecutor for the case, borrow a prosecutor from another jurisdiction, or put in place
efficient screening methods to keep the new attorney out of the case.

During a trial recess, the judge requested that all parties meet with him in chambers for a brief meeting. When the
judge arrived, he indicated that he was about to retire from the court and was curious whether either of their
businesses was hiring litigation attorneys, as he could be interested. Could the judge face disciplinary action under
the Model Rules of Professional Conduct for conducting this investigation?

A) No, the Model Rules of Professional Responsibility do not apply to judges, because the Code of Judicial Conduct
regulates judicial behavior and activities.

B) Yes, the judge should not have spoken with both lawyers at the same time, since if one of them offers the judge a
job at his firm right away, the other will feel obligated to do the same, and may even feel compelled to offer a larger
pay than the first.

C) No, this was only a preliminary enquiry, not a job offer from either of the lawyers’ firms.

D) Yes, according to the Model Rules, a lawyer may not negotiate for employment with someone who is involved as a
party or as a lawyer for a party in a matter in which the lawyer is directly and significantly involved as a judge.

Correct!
Wrong!

Explanation:
Correct Answer:
Yes, according to the Model Rules, a lawyer may not negotiate for employment with someone who is involved as a
party or as a lawyer for a party in a matter in which the lawyer is directly and significantly involved as a judge.

MPRE Practice Test

An attorney is a member of the board of directors of a corporation and serves as its lawyer. Which of the following statements about this circumstance is correct?

Related Post