Hello, could you help me by applying the ABA rules with the subsections of each rule or comments on the rules that apply to each question?

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/professional_responsibility/publications/model_rules_of_professional_conduct/model_rules_of_professional_conduct_table_of_contents/

Problem I

Ernesto Valencia is chief assistant general counsel to Giant Automobile, Inc., one of the nation's "Big Four" automotive companies

I. Giant's electronics division produces its own smart-phone interfaces for all Giant cars. Giant's electronics laboratory tests have disclosed that the standard smart- phone interface uses a defective Bluetooth "pairing" mechanism that will require re- pairing phones with the car speakers approximately every 50-60 "use instances," or anytime the phone is removed from the car. Eventually, the Bluetooth interface will stop working completely, after approximately 700 pairings, which for most custom- ers will likely be shortly after the one-year warranty expires. The Bluetooth problem snow been changed for newer vehicles, but 1,200,000 Giants with phone-paring problems are on the road.

The complete Bluetooth package, including new software and the labor to rein- stall it, costs Giant about $82 a car. Despite the fact that almost all the pairing fail- ures occur outside the warranty period, Giant has received a large number of calls and emails from people complaining that their phone can no longer be paired with the speakers in their car.

Questions

1. May Valencia advise Giant to replace the Bluetooth units for those who have complained? Should he? May he inform his client that if it does nothing, the prob- ability of legal action against Giant is slight, since even in a class action, monetary damages would be difficult to show? 2. What about customers who bought these models but who have not com- plained? Since there is an admitted defect, should Ernie advise that all the pairing systems be recalled and replaced? 3. Assume the new Bluetooth "fix" is far more expensive than the old defective one. May Ernie advise Giant that it may continue to sell cars with the old system and just deal with complaints as they arise? 4. May Ernie say anything about the defect to anyone outside Giant? What if he discovers evidence of a fraudulent financial arrangement between Giant and the subcontractors producing the defective system?

II.

Giant has discovered in controlled proving grounds tests that its most popular model, the Venezia Sedan, has defective brake fluid distribution that under certain changes in climatic conditions can cause complete brake failure. There are two mil- lion Venezias on the road. Company climate experts and statisticians have written a report noting that the likelihood of complete brake failure is slight, and estimating that complete brake failure is likely to cause no more than one accident per every 100,000 vehicles per year. It is not known precisely how many of these accidents would result in a fatality, but based on reports "in the field," the company's internal auditors have been able to identify a small number of "serious accidents"-between 15 and 20 per year- as being caused by the brake failure. Finally, repair of the Venezias is complicated. The cost to repair these vehicles is estimated at $135 per car. That would cost the company $270,000,000 for a com- plete recall of all 2,000,000 Venezias.

Questions

1. May Valencia advise the company to litigate all claims as they occur, on grounds of proximate cause, contributory negligence, etc.?

2. When these facts are presented to him, must or should Ernie advise Giant to recall all affected cars? What should he do if Giant refuses? What may he do? Would the analysis be different if Valencia were outside counsel?

3. Does it matter that the estimated number of accidents each year is 15 or 20? What if it were 50? Or 200? Or 3?

4. Does it matter that the cost of a recall is $270,000,000? What if it were only $27,000,000? What if it were $2,700,000,000, and would put Giant in bankruptcy?

May Ernie consider the potentially ruinous consequences both financially and emo- tionally of the car company going broke on Giant workers and their families?

5. Does it matter what version of the ABA Model Rules applies in Ernie's state? Or if Ernie is in California, where the state versions of Model Rules 1.6 and 1.13 are different? Which rule, 1.6 or 1.13, trumps the other?

6. Regardless of the rules, Ernie will have to make a decision balancing ethics rules, personal morality, and the economic reality of facing the possible loss of his job. We might call it in-house counsel's "trilemma." How should he balance these considerations?