Model Rule 1.1: Competence
Rule 1.1 requires a lawyer to provide competent representation to every client. That means the lawyer must bring the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and preparation reasonably necessary to handle the matter well.
When it applies
This comes up whenever a lawyer takes on a matter outside their usual practice area, handles new or evolving areas of law (including technology), or fails to adequately prepare; on the MPRE it's tested through fact patterns involving inexperienced lawyers, unfamiliar legal fields, or lack of research.
What the rule requires
- Possess or acquire sufficient legal knowledge and skill for the matter undertaken
- Act with thoroughness and adequate preparation before advising or representing a client
- Engage in reasonable diligence in analyzing facts and law relevant to the matter
- Keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, including benefits and risks of relevant technology
- Associate with or consult another competent lawyer when necessary to handle a matter properly, or decline/limit the representation if competence cannot be achieved
Exceptions
- A lawyer may become competent through reasonable preparation and study even without prior experience in the field
- Emergency situations may justify limited advice or assistance where referral to, or consultation or association with, another lawyer is impractical, so long as the assistance is limited to what the emergency requires
How the MPRE tests Model Rule 1.1
- Students assume a lawyer must already have subject-matter expertise before taking a case, when the rule allows gaining competence through adequate preparation
- Confusing isolated minor mistakes (which are not automatically violations) with a pattern of inadequate preparation or skill
- Overlooking that competence includes staying current on technology, not just substantive law
- Mixing up Rule 1.1 (competence) with Rule 1.3 (diligence) or 1.4 (communication) when the real issue is lack of follow-through rather than lack of knowledge
Example
A solo practitioner who normally handles wills is asked to represent a client in a complex patent litigation matter. If the lawyer spends significant time researching patent law, consults with a patent attorney, and adequately prepares before proceeding, this satisfies Rule 1.1; if the lawyer instead plunges in without adequate preparation or consultation, this violates the rule.
Related rules
A plain-English summary of the ABA Model Rule, not the rule text. Your jurisdiction's version of the rule controls in practice.