WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS BLOG:

After evaluating the ethics question concerning if Carlos and John has violated any ethical rules my response to that question is absolutely.There are several components that make up my conclusion: 1) John, the attorney should have reviewed the information provided by the paralegal Carlos prior to advising the client. Since the client has been advised partial information there has been a breach of duty of competence due to Carlos' negligence. Every client is owed to a duty of competence. In the ABA Model Code of Professional Responsibility Canon 6 (pg. 88) states "a lawyer should represent a client competently", meaning the ability to do something successfully or efficiently. The paralegal and the attorney are obligated to provide sustenance for the duty of competence to the client. Base on page 90 of the textbook, Rule 1.1 of the Model Rules gives the description as competency "requires knowledge of the law, 'careful' research" and neither Carlos or John has displayed those attributes. When applying "careful research Carlos has a responsibility to be thorough, diligent, skillful and precise vs not thinking through every possible avenue to ensure that John had all that was needed so information would not be withheld from the client.

SUMMARIZE AND TELL ME YOUR THOUGHTS