Rule 1.2 Scope of Representation And Allocation of Authority Between Client And Lawyer

Client-Lawyer Relationship

Allocation of Authority between Client and Lawyer

[1] Paragraph (a) confers upon the client the ultimate authority to determine the purposes to be served by legal representation, within the limits imposed by law and the lawyer’s professional obligations. The decisions specified in paragraph (a), such as whether to settle a civil matter, must also be made by the client. See Rule 1.4(a)(1) for the lawyer’s duty to communicate with the client about such decisions. With respect to the means by which the client’s objectives are to be pursued, the lawyer shall consult with the client as required by Rule 1.4(a)(2) and may take such action as is impliedly authorized to carry out the representation.

[2] On occasion, however, a lawyer and a client may disagree about the means to be used to accomplish the client’s objectives. Clients normally defer to the special knowledge and skill of their lawyer with respect to the means to be used to accomplish their objectives, particularly with respect to technical, legal and tactical matters. Conversely, lawyers usually defer to the client regarding such questions as the expense to be incurred and concern for third persons who might be adversely affected. Because of the varied nature of the matters about which a lawyer and client might disagree and because the actions in question may implicate the interests of a tribunal or other persons, this Rule does not prescribe how such disagreements are to be resolved. Other law, however, may be applicable and should be consulted by the lawyer. The lawyer should also consult with the client and seek a mutually acceptable resolution of the disagreement. If such efforts are unavailing and the lawyer has a fundamental disagreement with the client, the lawyer may withdraw from the representation. See Rule

Read the rest

Professional Independence of a Lawyer

Law Firms And Associations

(a) A lawyer or law firm shall not share legal fees with a nonlawyer, except that:

(1) an agreement by a lawyer with the lawyer’s firm, partner, or associate may provide for the payment of money, over a reasonable period of time after the lawyer’s death, to the lawyer’s estate or to one or more specified persons;

(2) a lawyer who purchases the practice of a deceased, disabled, or disappeared lawyer may, pursuant to the provisions of Rule 1.17, pay to the estate or other representative of that lawyer the agreed-upon purchase price;

(3) a lawyer or law firm may include nonlawyer employees in a compensation or retirement plan, even though the plan is based in whole or in part on a profit-sharing arrangement; and

(4) a lawyer may share court-awarded legal fees with a nonprofit organization that employed, retained or recommended employment of the lawyer in the matter.

(b) A lawyer shall not form a partnership with a nonlawyer if any of the activities of the partnership consist of the practice of law.

(c) A lawyer shall not permit a person who recommends, employs, or pays the lawyer to render legal services for another to direct or regulate the lawyer’s professional judgment in rendering such legal services.

(d) A lawyer shall not practice with or in the form of a professional corporation or association authorized to practice law for a profit, if:

(1) a nonlawyer owns any interest therein, except that a fiduciary representative of the estate of a lawyer may hold the stock or interest of the lawyer for a reasonable time during administration;

(2) a nonlawyer is a corporate director or officer thereof or occupies the position of similar responsibility in any form of association other

Read the rest

Rule 3.7 Lawyer As Witness


[1] Combining the roles of advocate and witness can prejudice the tribunal and the opposing party and can also involve a conflict of interest between the lawyer and client.

Advocate-Witness Rule

[2] The tribunal has proper objection when the trier of fact may be confused or misled by a lawyer serving as both advocate and witness. The opposing party has proper objection where the combination of roles may prejudice that party’s rights in the litigation. A witness is required to testify on the basis of personal knowledge, while an advocate is expected to explain and comment on evidence given by others. It may not be clear whether a statement by an advocate-witness should be taken as proof or as an analysis of the proof.

[3] To protect the tribunal, paragraph (a) prohibits a lawyer from simultaneously serving as advocate and necessary witness except in those circumstances specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(3). Paragraph (a)(1) recognizes that if the testimony will be uncontested, the ambiguities in the dual role are purely theoretical. Paragraph (a)(2) recognizes that where the testimony concerns the extent and value of legal services rendered in the action in which the testimony is offered, permitting the lawyers to testify avoids the need for a second trial with new counsel to resolve that issue. Moreover, in such a situation the judge has firsthand knowledge of the matter in issue; hence, there is less dependence on the adversary process to test the credibility of the testimony.

[4] Apart from these two exceptions, paragraph (a)(3) recognizes that a balancing is required between the interests of the client and those of the tribunal and the opposing party. Whether the tribunal is likely to be misled or the opposing party is likely to suffer prejudice

Read the rest

Prominent lawyer says he shouldn’t be struck off for misconduct

A high-profile lawyer says he shouldn’t be struck off after invoicing a client almost $3500 for a report which could be done for free.

Christopher Tennet faced the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal today at a penalty hearing, with the hopes he can continue working as a lawyer.

At a hearing last year Tennet faced a charge of professional misconduct when he invoiced a “vulnerable client” for a report, to the tune of $3450.

He later claimed he had no intention of receiving the funds and accepted his conduct was unsatisfactory.

The charge was proven and Tennet, a Wellington lawyer with almost four decades of experience in criminal law, will know the fate of his career when a decision is released by the tribunal in the coming weeks.

The case against Tennet dated back to 2017, when he attempted to get his vulnerable client to pay an invoice of $3450 for a privately obtained drug and alcohol report needed in her upcoming sentencing.

Tennet invoiced the amount to his client when the actual cost would have been $1200, however, such an assessment could be done for free through the courts.

When a report was organised free of charge at a later date for the woman, it was that report writer who complained about Tennet’s conduct.

The invoice was found to be false by the tribunal and an attempt to lever money from the woman, who has permanent name suppression.

She was the partner of a well-known criminal, a man who had been a client of Tennet’s in the past.

She was assaulted by her partner, the man she relied on to pay her legal fees, just days before the misconduct.

As a result Tennet withdrew as her lawyer claiming a conflict of interest.

Lawyer Matthew Mortimer-Wong, acting on

Read the rest

Felicity Huffman, Kennedy McMann Lead The Good Lawyer

In the sixteenth episode of The Good Doctor‘s sixth season, Dr. Shaun Murphy (Freddie Highmore) will be taking off his lab coat for a while in order to make room for the defenders of law and justice. Steering away from hospital facilities, ABC has released the trailer for the medical drama‘s next episode titled “The Good Lawyer,” which not only takes viewers to the court setting but also serves as an integrated pilot episode for the possible female-led spin-off series.

The planned spin-off will be introduced in the upcoming season of The Good Doctor via a backdoor pilot. Kennedy McMann (Nancy Drew) and Felicity Huffman (Desperate Housewives) will appear as special guests in the upcoming episode, introducing the characters they will play if The Good Lawyer is picked up and given a series order. The trailer shows Higmore’s Shaun trying to obtain legal representation with McMann’s Joni DeGoot, a brilliant young lawyer who is diagnosed with obsessive-compulsive disorder. Described as a “brilliant, funny, and self-aware lawyer who is relatively new to her prestigious law firm,” her OCD symptoms enable her to focus more intently on details and see things from a different angle, though—of course—not without some negative effects on her personal life. The trailer also highlights Shaun choosing Joni to represent him in the malpractice case he is being sued for, despite Dr. Aaron Glassman (Richard Schiff) bringing Huffman’s “highly regarded attorney” Janet Stewart to take over the case.


In Episode 15 of the show’s sixth season, Shaun received unfortunate news about being sued for malpractice. Though the details of the case are still unknown, the promo delves deeper, with Shaun putting his faith in Joni. Even

Read the rest

Police books lawyer for threatening female district officer

Rawalpindi: Officials of Police Station Civil Lines on Thursday has booked a lawyer on charges of hurling threats of dire consequences towards a female district officer for launching anti enforcement operation, informed sources.

The accused lawyer has been identified as Mudassir Malik against whom case was registered under sections 186/188/506 of PPC on complaint of Noshia Afzal, District Officer Regulations, they said.

Police have launched manhunt to arrest the accused, sources said.

Accoring to sources, Noshia Afzal, the applicant, lodged complaint with PS Civil Lines officials stating that District Council often launch operation against encroachments which is its prime responsibility. She added she was informed by the council that according to newspaper reports, the residents of Adiala Road are suffering a lot due to massive encroachments there.

Noshia Afzal told police she along with her team carried out an operation against encroachments in Dhama Morr; issued fine to shopkeepers and confiscated the goods displayed by the shopkeepers on roads. She added that a lawyer namely Mudassir Malik entered in her office and asked her to return goods of his client which she refused to do so and suggested the lawyer to adopt legal process. On which, she said, the lawyer misbehaved and hurled threats of dire consequences. The complainant asked police to register case against the accused and to arrest him.

Police filed case and began investigation.

Read the rest

Alex Murdaugh lawyer calls trial a ‘miscarriage’ of justice

A lawyer for convicted murderer Alex Murdaugh said he was “shocked” when the jury returned a guilty verdict so quickly, and called the end result of the sensational trial “a miscarriage of justice.”

“There was six weeks of evidence and there was so little evidence on the actual murders. There’s no murder weapons. There’s no bloody clothes. There’s no motive to the murder,” Jim Griffin told Chris Cuomo on cuomo-show/jim-griffin-alex-murdaugh-reaction-appeal/”NewsNation Friday night. “We thought the jury would have to work through a lot of that.”

One juror has said it took the panel less than an hour Thursday to find Murdaugh, 54, guilty of killing his wife, Maggie, 52, and son, Paul, 22, in 2021.

 “That’s not a deliberation. That is concerning frankly,” Griffin told Cuomo.

Griffin insisted to Cuomo that members of the Murdaugh family came away from the trial “more convinced than ever that he did not do it.”

Jim Griffin Chris Cuomo
Alex Murdaugh’s lawyer Jim Griffin told Chris Cuomo he was “shocked” by the speed of jury deliberations.

Asked why Murdaugh, a disbarred lawyer, took the witness stand, Griffin called it a “hail Mary” move. It came after Murdaugh admitted lying about his whereabouts the night his wife and son were killed.

“Frankly, we had to throw a hail Mary by putting him on the stand, to explain the lie, explain why he cheated, explain why he stole and because of his drug addiction,” Griffin said. “We had hoped that jurors had experience, whether family members or relatives, of how drug addicts lie, cheat and steal. And they would have understanding of that. Obviously, that did not work.”

Murdaugh received two life sentences Friday.

His lawyers intend to appeal.

Read the rest

The Spinoff Show Of ‘The Good Doctor’

Following tonight’s episode of The Good Doctor, ABC released a trailer for the upcoming episode airing on March 13, which is a built-in pilot for a potential spin-off- The Good Lawyer.

Nancy Drew star Kennedy McMann and Emmy-winning Desperate Housewives alum Felicity Huffman co-star in the episode and introduce their characters, who would direct The Good Lawyer if the legal drama became a series. The planned legal spin-off of the popular ABC medical series The Good Doctor, from Sony Pictures Television and ABC Signature.

Also, Read- Chris Rock Calls Out Meghan Markle Over Her ‘Racism Claims’ Against Royal Family

In the episode “The Good Lawyer,” written by David Shore and Liz Friedman, co-executive producers of The Good Doctor, and directed by Ruben Fleischer, Dr. Shaun Murphy (Freddie Highmore) hires a lawyer and trusts a young lawyer. And-comer Joni DeGroot (McMann), suffers from obsessive-compulsive disorder.

Huffman plays Janet Stewart, a highly respected attorney, and partner in the law firm that owns Dr. Aaron Glassman (Richard Schiff) has represented him on a variety of legal matters over the years, so he turns to her to represent his beloved protégé. But when Shaun states that he wants Joni to represent him, Janet is forced to let Joni lead the case.

The trailer shows Shaun meeting Janet and Joni and also sheds some light on the negligence case for which he is being sued.

Also, Read- “James Cameron Is Not Good With His Crew,” Said Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Stunt Double

Watch the trailer and you can see a video where McMann, Huffman, and Bethlehem Million who plays Abbie in The Good Lawyer, as well as Shore and Friedman, talk about their characters. In it, McMann revisits his lifelong struggles with OCD.

Read the rest

Lawyer Wameli’s body expected to arrive in Uganda today

Ebenezer Faith Ministry leaders addressing the press at a <a href=church in Kanyanya ” itemprop=”image”/

Ebenezer Faith Ministry leaders addressing the press at a church in Kanyanya

The body of former National Unity Platform (NUP) lead lawyer Anthony Wameli will arrive in the country today Friday, according to his family.

Wameli succumbed to colon cancer at Boston Medical Centre in Massachusetts, US on February 8, 2023, following his admission in September 2021.

After Wameli’s death, information started circulating that his family was stuck and needed over Shs 200 million to return the body. Two weeks after his death, it was said the family had managed to only secure Shs 40 million.

Addressing journalists on Thursday at Ebenezer Faith Ministry in Kanyanya, a church founded by Wameli, deacon Samuel Boloki revealed that preparations for the repatriation of the deceased’s body are complete and the body is expected in the country between 2 pm and 3 pm today March 3.

He explained that the church, family, friends, and NUP worked together to see that Wameli’s body is returned to the country for the final rituals. He dismissed rumours that NUP had abandoned Wameli’s family during the trying period.

Barely a week ago, the NUP leadership said they were working on returning Wameli’s body although the paperwork needed for the repatriation was delayed. The party’s secretary general Lewis Lubongoya made the revelation during a funeral service held at a church in Massachusetts.

Deacon Boloki says that when the body arrives on Friday, it shall be taken to the NUP offices in Kamwokya for public viewing and later to Wameli’s home in Kyetume in Mukono district for a night vigil. The following day, Saturday, the body shall be taken to Ebenezer Faith Church in Kanyanya where a service shall be held and the body viewed again as family and friends

Read the rest

Labor Lawyer Shares ‘Big Mistake’ Workers Do When Quitting Job

From ‘quiet quitting‘ to an increase in layoffs, more and more people are leaving their previous place of employment behind. For many, when they leave a company, it’s on good terms — but sometimes malpractice or another worrying event that happened makes you want to consult a labor lawyer.

TikTokers like Ryan (@attorneyryan) help the average viewer become more aware of their labor rights, but in a new video, the labor lawyer warned viewers of something they should never do if they’re leaving a workplace that mistreated them.

“I just had to turn away another client because there’s literally nothing that I could do for them, and it’s because they made a critical mistake that you’ve probably made at every job you worked,” he explained.

“Just because your boss or HR says you have to sign something, that does not make it true. You don’t have to sign anything when you’re fired,” Ryan continued. “You don’t have to sign anything when you quit. They say you do, but they’re liars. They’re not lawyers, they don’t know what they’re talking about.”

That being said, Ryan also added that you should remain skeptical if a lawyer representing your employer also pressures you to sign something — pointing out that just because they’re a legal professional, doesn’t mean they have your best interests at heart.

“If a lawyer from the company says you have to do that, please understand that lawyer works for the company — they’re trying to screw you,” he added. “Once you sign that severance agreement and take that money, you’re done — I can’t help you anymore.”

@attorneyryan PSA — Don’t sign anything you don’t understand! #knowyourrights ♬ original sound – The Labor Lawyer

In a statement to the Daily Dot, Ryan said, “It is common for employers to

Read the rest