Write Your Exam Code Here: Return this exam question paper to your invigilator at the end of the exam before you leave the classroom. FACULTY OF LAW THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA FINAL EXAMINATION December 2017 Ethics and Professionalism Law 468.003 & Law 555C.003 (fall term) Instructor Greg DelBigio EXAM INSTRUCTIONS - READ WITH CARE! THIS EXAMINATION CONSISTS OF 7 PAGES. PLEASE ENSURE YOU HAVE A COMPLETE EXAMINATION. THIS EXAM IS FOR BOTH GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS TIME: FOR LAW 468M03 STUDENTS, THIS EXAM IS 2 HOURS INCLUDING READING TIME. FOR LAW READING TIME 555C.003 STUDENTS, THIS EXAM IS 2.5 HOURS INCLUDING LAW STUDENTS ARE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS NOT TO ANSWER QUESTION #4 468.003 1,2 AND 3 AND ARE FOR LAW TOTAL 468.003 STUDENTS, EACH QUESTION IS WORTH 331/3 % OF THE LAW 555C.003 STUDENTS MUST ANSWER QUESTIONS 1, 2, 3 AND 4 FOR LAW 555C.003 STUDENTS, EACH QUESTION IS WORTH 25% OF THE TOTAL TOTAL MARKS: 100 PLEASE NOTE THE POINTS ALLOCATED TO EACH QUESTION AND USE YOUR TIME WELL. THIS IS AN OPEN BOOK EXAM. PLEASE READ EACH QUESTION WITH CARE.
Question I 1. Before becoming a judge, Dana used to work at a large law firm (Firm X) that has offices in several countries. Firm X is one of several firms that sponsor a large annual conference. The topic of the conference is construction law. Firm X advertises as having expertise in this area of law. As a sponsor, Firm X has posters at different areas at the conference site and Firm X also hosts a cocktail reception on the final day of the conference. Firm X provides snacks and drinks to those in attendance at the cocktail party. Before becoming a judge, Dana worked with and became friends with Casey. Casey and Dana have continued to be friends since Dana s appointment to the bench. Since Dana sometimes presides over construction law cases Casey suggested that Dana attend the conference. Casey also suggested that Dana attend the cocktail party and that they go for dinner afterwards with a few people from the firm. Because construction law is an area of law that is difficult and always changing, Dana accepted the invitation. Dana also thought it would be good to catch up with old friends. The sessions at the conference were much like a class room in that people sat in the audience and a panel sat at the front and discussed recent developments in the law.
Question I (continued) The cocktail party was however different. People were mingling and Dana recognized some of those in attendance as being clients of Firm X. Many people from Firm X seemed happy to see Dana and there was a lot of handshaking and small talk. Dana was relieved when it was finally time to go for dinner. Firm X went all out as it often did it had a private room at an expensive restaurant that has an expensive wine list. Dana entered the room and saw several familiar faces. There were also some people who were unknown to Dana. Firm Y competes with Firm X for construction law business. A lawyer for Firm Y saw Dana at the conference. The same lawyer also saw Dana at the cocktail reception and coincidentally went to the same restaurant where Firm X had rented the private room. The lawyer peaked into the room and saw Dana. The lawyer also recognized one of the people in the private room as the owner of a large construction company. The lawyer from Firm Y made a complaint against Dana to the judicial council. The complaint stated that Dana s impartiality has been compromised. Dana has retained you to assess the extent of the problem, if any. What problems, if any, does Dana have?
Question 2 2. Judge X is now retired and in private practice. Before retiring he presided over a case between Company Y and Company Z. Company Y was unsuccessful and has appealed. Company Y hired a private investigative agency. A private investigator from that agency, while posing as a potential client, contacted X and asked for a meeting. After the first meeting the investigator, while still posing as a potential client, invited X to dinner. While at dinner, X was secretly photographed and audiotaped. During conversation, the investigator attempted to prompt X into making anti-semitic remarks. Company Y gave the recordings to their lawyers and asked the lawyers to attempt to use the recordings as part of the appeal. Assume that it was not illegal for the rhotograrhs or audiotapes to have been made. a. Would it have been proper for the lawyers for Company Y to have asked the private investigator to do what he did? Explain. b. If the lawyers had not asked the private investigator to do what he did, is it ethically permissible for them to make any use of the photographs or tapes? Explain.
Question 3 3. Sam has a one person law firm. Sam has accepted an offer to join a larger firm and is closing files as she gets ready to close her firm. Her list of trust funds shows that client Dave has $500 in trust, client Sally has $100 in trust and client Billy has $1500 in trust. Billy deposited cash. Sam has done some, but not much work since she last billed Dave. In order to close the file, she decides to send him a bill for all services rendered in the amount of $500. Sam has not done anything for client Sally since the last bill was sent and the issue that Sam was hired to address has long been concluded and Sam no longer knows where client Sally is. This creates a headache for Sam. Sam re thinks the work she did and concludes that she did not fully account for the work she did and she under billed client Sally. On that basis, Sam issued a bill for all services rendered in the amount of $100. Sam contacts client Billy. Billy wants the funds returned and Sam agrees. Billy says he will stop by the firm to collect a trust cheque. Sam agrees and prepares a trust cheque in the amount of $1500. For each of the three client scenarios, discuss whether Sam acted in accordance with the rules or not. If not, what rule(s) was violated?
Question 4 4. Richard is a young lawyer and friends with both Sally and Bob. Richard has known them both since before they were married, before they became parents and before he went to law school. Regrettably, Sally and Bob have decided to divorce. Both have spoken to Richard about this and because they are friends Richard has been sympathetic. One afternoon Richard ran into Sally at a coffee shop. She sat down and told him that she believes that Bob had an affair. She told Richard she is angry and that she doesn t want Bob to get access to more of her salary than is necessary. She also doesn t want Bob to get access to any of her family money and she asked Richard for advice on what she does and does not have to disclose. Richard told her he doesn t practice family law and doesn t want to get involved but she pressed him to assist as a friend. Richard told her that if money came from her family it is hers and hers alone. On a separate day Bob approached Richard at the gym. Before Richard could speak, Bob told Richard he was going to seek custody of the baby because Sally is always working and is never home. Richard agreed that a judge would be sympathetic to Bob s case. Richard also knew that while Bob seems to be a good dad, his ability to earn a good income is not as good as Sally s. Bob says isn t sure how he and the baby will support themselves and Richard suggested that between Sally s income and her family money, he was sure it will all work out. Regrettably, the case seems to be headed to a courtroom. Bob has filed papers on his own behalf. In those papers he claims financial support from Sally s
Question 4 (continued) income and the family money Richard told him about. Bob also accuses Sally of being deceptive by not disclosing the existence of the family money. Sally now accuses Richard of betraying her friendship. She has also reported Richard to the law society. You are a lawyer with the law society. Identify and discuss any Code of Conduct violations Richard has committed.