Sheesh. Good job. I mentioned fee splitting, stating that she cant split fees with the disbarred attorney which could be happening given that the structure of the firm was similar and in proximity to the old firm (plus the supervisory nature of her actions). And talked about referrals, since the word was used--even though it was seemingly not discussing an actual referral. And made slight mention of fees. But I didn't talk about retainers much at all (maybe just, needs to be in writing, etc., and not clear that it was). I did zero CA/ABA distinctions...I really couldn't think of any. Were there a ton?maureenwct wrote:I think the PR question tangentially focused on retainers - at least I mentioned that, as it was a new firm, a new retainer should have been executed, and the client needed to understand that there was no fee splitting (or the portion of the bill owed to the former firm), but that the firm had reorganized and reformed into a new entity. I went on about the distinctions between retainers between the ABA and California; this was my 'make it fit' attempt because I knew those rules well.
I also said that there existed a conflict between the loyalties to the client and to the former member of the firm on the part of the current attorney, as evidenced by her decision to rehire a disbarred counsel, and provide her with what seemed to be supervisory authority and legal decision making over the former client. I also said that there could not be a blanket statement to ignore an existing court order, that the penalties for that failure could be criminal, and that one is effectively counseling a criminal act; on reflection, that was a stretch, because I should have said that perhaps the order to do a service (play a sport) was inappropriately entered because the court will not usually police injuctions of that type.....
I was rambling at that point bc I elected to do the PT before the PR essay, and left myself only 45 minutes on the PR.
If anything, I really learned that a few more minutes of thinking despite the time ticking away might have produced a better ansswer.
Anyways, I did PT first too (and think it was absolutely the right way to go), but may have sacrificed 5 on the PR. I mentioned the servitude stuff as part of competence but really didn't think about the conflict.