Question Analysis
Carol, a woman with young children, applied to rent an apartment owned and managed by Landlords, Inc. (Corporation) Landlords, Inc. rejected her application.
Believing that Landlords, Inc. had rejected her application because she had young children, Carol (Client) retained Abel (Attorney #1) to represent her to sue Landlords, Inc. (An attorney-client relationship was formed ASAP) for violation of state anti-discrimination laws, which prohibit refusal to rent to individuals with children.
Landlords, Inc. retained Barbara to represent it in the lawsuit. (L is now a represented party.) Barbara notified Abel that she represented Landlords, Inc. (A knows L is represented by B)
Abel invited Ford, the former manager (former employee) of rental properties for Landlords, Inc., to lunch. (duty of fairness regarding ex parte communication) Ford had participated in the decision on Carol’s application, but left his employment shortly afterwards. (high level former employees) Abel questioned Ford about Landlords, Inc.’s rental practices and about certain conversations Ford had had with Barbara regarding the rental practices and Carol’s application.
During a deposition (sworn testimony) by Barbara, Carol testified falsely about her sources of income. (ABA and CA distinctions regarding client's perjury) Abel, who attended the deposition, suspected (Attorney had knowledge) that Carol was not being truthful, but did nothing. (Duty of confidentiality)
After the deposition ended and Carol had left, Barbara told Abel that Landlords, Inc. would settle the dispute for $5,000. (Client's decision to settle) Abel accepted the offer,(without the client's knowledge or consent) signed the settlement papers that day, and told Carol about the settlement that night. (Duty of communication, duty of competence, duty of loyalty, duty of diligence) Carol was unhappy with the amount of the settlement.
What, if any, ethical violations has Abel committed? (#1) Discuss.
Answer according to California and ABA authorities.
Outline
1. Meeting with Former Employee
(1) Duty of Fairness- No communication with parties L knows to be represented by other L
1) F is a former employee
2. Doing Nothing for Client's False Deposition Testimony
(1) Mandatory Withdrawal (exception to duty of confidentiality)
1) ABA: tell client not to do so, attempt to withdraw from the case, and finally tell the judge if the attempt to draw is unsuccessful.
2) CA: not tell the judge but must allow his client to testify in a narrative fashion and must counsel the client not to lie
3. Settlement Offer
(1) Duty to Communicate
(2) Scope of Representation
(3) Duty of Diligence/Competence/Duty of Loyalty