Margerita Clark, a paralegal, discovered that her supervising attorney, Edgar Carmella, billed their client for the billable hours Margerita had worked on the client's case at his hourly rate rather than her lower hourly rate. In addition, no notice was given to the client that much of the work done on the case was done by a nonlawyer (Margerita). She brought this information to Edgar's attention, but nothing was done. Later, her supervisors directed Margerita at times to bill her work directly as attorney's time instead of at her hourly rate despite her protests that the practice was improper. When she continued to protest, the firm responded by imposing new work rules and hours, and subsequently, she was terminated. Margerita brought a lawsuit for wrongful discharge from her employment. Her former employers moved to dismiss the case. Answer the following:

A. After Margerita told her attorney about the improper billing and the firm directed her to bill her time as attorney's time, what would you recommend that she do?

B. If Margerita had informed the clients and authorities of the firm's fraudulent billing practices, what would her purpose be in "blowing the whistle" on the firm? What would you expect the court's decision to be?

C. Should the court allow the case to go to court? Explain your answer.