1. Did the attorney Lawless maintain a direct relationship with the cli-ents? What is the basis for...

Question

1. Did the attorney Lawless maintain a direct relationship with the cli-ents? What is the basis for your conclusion?

2. Do you believe the sanctions were appropriate?

3. What do you think would have happened if the clients had filed amalpractice suit?

4. What was the paralegal’s relationship with the client, and how did itevolve over time? Was it professional or personal?

5. What evidence might show that the paralegal took advantage of theclient? Discuss the adequacy of this evidence.

Pankaj · Accepted Answer

Assignment Answers
1. The attorney Lawless continued to communicate with and meet with his clients, maintaining a relationship with them. Michael Seguin's residency status was initially obtained by Lawless for a fixed price of more than $5,000 in costs. Seguin was introduced to paralegal Charles Aboudraah by Lawless, whose non-attorney was in charge of the worker's behaviour.
2. The restrictions initially imposed by Lawless were by no means justified. This appears to be Lawless' non-lawyer employee conduct. A lawyer should charge the fee for his work as prescribed. The lawyer and client have a fiduciary relationship, which demands full disclosure in all financial transactions and forbids the lawyer from accepting any unstated fees.

1. Did the attorney Lawless maintain a direct relationship with the cli-ents? What is the basis for your conclusion? 2. Do you believe the sanctions were appropriate? 3. What do you think would have...

Solution

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

Submit New Assignment