MPRE practice EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 100% SOLVED (Newest 2025) Judge Jackman is a full-time judge in State A. Her father lives in a retirement home in State B. Judge Jackman's father told her on the telephone that several of his friends in the retirement home had employed attorney Abbott to write wills for them, that in each will attorney Abbott had included a bequest to himself, and that each bequest was approximately .5% of the estimated total value of the person's probable estate. The friends told Judge Jackman's father that they did not really want to leave Abbott anything; they had assumed it was merely a matter of routine, a part of the lawyer's compensation for drafting the will. Attorney Abbott is admitted to practice in State B, but not in State A. Judge Jackman did not talk personally with any of her father's friends, but she believes that her father's rendition of the story is entirely accurate. Would it be proper for Judge Jackman to communicate directly with attorne - Correct Answers ✅(a) yes, it would be proper for Judge Jackman to take the steps mentioned because she has received information indicating a substantial likelihood that Abbott has violated a legal ethics rule. Abbott has apparently violated ABA Model Rule 1.8(c), which generally prohibits a lawyer from drafting a will under which he will receive a substantial gift. A judge who receives "information indicating a substantial likelihood" that a lawyer has violated a legal ethics rule should take "appropriate action," which may include direct communication with the lawyer, direct action, and reporting the violation to the appropriate authority. If a judge knows that a lawyer has committed an ethics violation that raises a substantial question about the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness to practice law, then the judge must inform the 1 / 4
MPRE practice EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 100% SOLVED (Newest 2025) appropriate authority. [CJC 3D(2)] (B) is wrong because Judge Jackman does not have "personal knowledge" as that term is used in evidence law.[See CJC, Terminology] (C) is wrong because the duties imposed by CJC 3D(2) are not confined to lawyers in the judge's own jurisdiction. (D) is wrong because "appropriate action" may include direct communication with the lawyer who violated the legal ethics rule. [CJC 3D(2), Commentary] Lawyer Long, three years out of law school, had never set foot in a courtroom. Long was on the board of directors of the Community Nursery School ("CNS"), a nonprofit preschool for underprivileged children. One of the CNS teachers was charged with felony child abuse for allegedly molesting three of the CNS pupils. After conducting its own careful investigation, the CNS board of directors concluded that the criminal charge was totally unfounded, and the board resolved to provide defense counsel for the teacher. Long volunteered to do the work without a fee. A few days before the trial was to begin, Long got cold feet and became convinced that he was incompetent to serve as the teacher's trial counsel. He asked the trial judge for permission to withdraw. After thoroughly questioning Long about his
preparation for trial, the judge said: Mr. Long, I understand
your anxiety, but you are perfectly competent to handle this - Correct Answers ✅(a) When ordered to do so by a tribunal, a lawyer must continue representation notwithstanding good cause for terminating the representation. [ABA Model Rule1.16(c)] Even if Long was absolutely convinced of his own incompetence, he is subject 2 / 4
MPRE practice EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 100% SOLVED (Newest 2025) to discipline for abandoning the teacher in violation of the trial judge's order. (B) is wrong for the reason stated above.(C) is wrong because a lawyer is not subject to discipline for taking on a case that he is not competent to handle if he puts in the time and study needed to make himself competent to handle it. [See Comment 4 to ABA Model Rule 1.1] Having volunteered to take on the case, Long's duty was to put in the requisite time and study. (D) is wrong because a lawyer's duties of competence, diligence, and loyalty are no lower in a pro bono matter than in a fee-paying matter.During a brief recess in jury deliberations of a criminal case, juror called a friend attorney and asked for help in understanding a legal concept, "beyond a reasonable doubt".Attorney explained the term. Subject to discipline?(a) yes, bc he communicated with a juror about a pending case.(b) yes, bc given the circumstances and shortness of time, his explanation may have been misleading.(c) no, unless he was not competent in the field of criminal law.(d) no, unless he was in some manner connected with the case. - Correct Answers ✅(a) Aulet is subject to discipline because he communicated with a juror about a pending case. During the trial of a case, no lawyer, whether or not connected with the case, is allowed to communicate with a juror about the case. [ABA Model Rule 3.5(b)—refer-ring the matter to local law, which generally prohibits communication with a juror during the trial of the 3 / 4
MPRE practice EXAM QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 100% SOLVED (Newest 2025) case or jury deliberations; seealso ABA Model Rule 8.4(d)— proscribing conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice] (B) is wrong because Aulet should not have communicated with Jimmerson about the case at all, whatever the quality of his advice. (C) is wrong because Aulet is subject to discipline for communicating with a juror, regardless of whether he was or was not competent in the field of criminal law. (D) is wrong because the prohibition against a lawyer communicating with a juror while a trial is pending applies to all lawyers, not just to those connected with the case.Duffy graduated from law school, but he never took the bar examination and was never admitted to practice. He works as an investigator and paralegal for the law firm of Schnell & Gao, a professional corporation. Which of the following statements are true? I. On Duffy's recommendation, one of Duffy's friends retained lawyer Gao to represent her as plaintiff in a personal injury case. It would be proper for Schnell & Gao to pay Duffy 10% of its fee in the case as compensation for the referral. II. Lawyer Schnell frequently assigns Duffy to draft wills for Schnell's estate planning clients. Schnell supervises Duffy's work, revises Duffy's drafts, and is ultimately responsible for the final product.Schnell is subject to discipline for assisting a nonlawyer to engage in the unauthorized practice of law. III. Schnell & Gao established a retirement plan that is funded partly by legal fees earned by the Finn's lawyers. The - Correct Answers ✅(c)
- / 4