Saul represents Jimmy in a family law case. Jimmy has told Saul that he has struggled with substance abuse and continues to use drugs occasionally. Jimmy's wife had similar substance abuse issues nut she appears to be in recovery. Jimmy wants primary custody and apreasrs reconciled to admitting his occasional drug use and seeking treatment. The wife's lawyer take Jimmy depo and asks him he still use drugs. Jimmy denies any drug use since the couple spilt. Saul asks no questions at the depo but later confronts his client about his denial of current drug use. Jimmy promises not to lie about the drugs again. Saul does nothing further and Jimmy doe snot correct the depo testimony. At trial doesn't raise the drug use but does as Jimmy to generally tell the jury why he believes he is a fit parent. Sail assues that Jimmy will avoid talking about drug use but Jimmy again says he has not used anything since the spilt. ONce crisis examination opposing counsel is ready to pounce but doesn't have any impreachment evidence that jimmy is lying. The jury asards primary custody to jimmy at the end of the first week fo trial. The trial will continue the following week with property division tried in a court with a jury. Saul confronts jimmy and insists that he not further perjured himself during the next trial.

What is Saul's best course of action and what Model rules of professional responabiltiy must Saul consider in determining how to proceed and contune repsrenting Jimmy ethically?