Fact Pattern:

Carol, a woman with young children, applied to rent an apartment owned and managed by Landlords, Inc. Landlords, Inc. rejected her application.

Believing that Landlords, Inc. had rejected her application because she had young children, Carol retained Abel to represent her to sue Landlords, Inc. 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. Barbara notified Abel that she represented Landlords, Inc.

Abel invited Ford, the former manager of rental properties for Landlords, Inc., to lunch. Ford had participated in the decision on Carol's application, but left his employment shortly afterwards. 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 by Barbara, Carol testified falsely about her sources of income. Abel, who attended the deposition, suspected that Carol was not being truthful, but did nothing.

After the deposition ended and Carol had left, Barbara told Abel that Landlords, Inc. would settle the dispute for $5,000. Abel accepted the offer, signed the settlement papers that day, and told Carol about the settlement that night. Carol was unhappy with the amount of the settlement.

What, if any, ethical violations has Abel committed? Discuss.

Question 1:What, if any, ethical violations has Abel committed? Discuss.

Question 2:What, if any, ethical violations hasLandlord Inc.committed? Discuss.

Question 3:Where do Ethics, Law, and Business decisions converge? Do you see any benefit in making ethical business decisions? Discuss.