Briefly

Free MPRE Practice Questions

One MPRE-style question for each of the twelve areas the exam tests. Answer it, then open the explanation to see which Model Rule decides it.

Regulation of the Legal Profession

1. A lawyer licensed only in State A regularly advises a corporate client headquartered in State A on a complex commercial dispute that has now resulted in litigation pending in State B. The lawyer has never been admitted in State B but travels there to assist local counsel of record, participates in depositions, and helps prepare witnesses, all while local counsel appears at every court hearing and signs all filings. The lawyer does not seek pro hac vice admission because local counsel assured him it was unnecessary for a lawyer merely 'assisting.' Is the lawyer subject to discipline?

  1. (A) No, because the lawyer's conduct is reasonably related to pending litigation and associated with locally admitted counsel who is responsible for the litigation.
  2. (B) No, because a lawyer may always assist local counsel in another jurisdiction without seeking admission there.
  3. (C) Yes, because only local counsel admitted in State B may perform any legal work related to the litigation.
  4. (D) Yes, because the lawyer failed to obtain pro hac vice admission before entering State B.
Show answer

A. Rule 5.5(c) lets an out-of-state lawyer provide temporary services when associated with a locally admitted lawyer who actively participates in the matter. It also covers work reasonably related to a pending proceeding, including preparatory work such as depositions and witness preparation. The tempting 'always' choice overstates the rule: the safe harbor is conditional, not unlimited, and the lawyer is protected here only because these conditions are met. Model Rule 5.5

The Client-Lawyer Relationship

2. A client hired a lawyer to defend her in a criminal case. During trial preparation, the client told the lawyer she wanted to testify in her own defense, even though the lawyer believed this would be disastrous given her prior inconsistent statements. The lawyer refused to call her as a witness and rested the defense case without her testimony. The client was convicted and now argues the lawyer violated his professional duties. Did the lawyer violate the Model Rules?

  1. (A) No, because trial strategy decisions, including whether to call a witness, belong exclusively to the lawyer.
  2. (B) Yes, because the decision whether to testify belongs to the client, not the lawyer.
  3. (C) Yes, because the lawyer must always follow the client's instructions regarding factual matters.
  4. (D) No, because the lawyer reasonably believed the testimony would harm the client's case.
Show answer

B. Under Rule 1.2(a), a criminal defendant decides, after consulting the lawyer, whether to testify. Overriding that decision violated the rule. The choice saying trial strategy, including calling witnesses, belongs exclusively to the lawyer is tempting because lawyers usually control tactical means. But a defendant's own testimony is one of the specific decisions the rule reserves to the client. Model Rule 1.2

Client Confidentiality

3. An attorney represents a client in a business dispute. During representation, the client privately admits to the attorney that years ago, in an unrelated matter, he forged a signature on a document that was never litigated and is now barred by the statute of limitations. The attorney later receives a subpoena from an unrelated party seeking testimony about what the client told her. May the attorney disclose the client's admission?

  1. (A) Yes, because the information concerns a completed crime and is therefore not protected.
  2. (B) Yes, because a subpoena is a legal command that automatically overrides confidentiality.
  3. (C) No, because the attorney may never reveal any information about a client under any circumstance.
  4. (D) No, because the information relates to the representation and no exception applies, absent a court order compelling disclosure after asserting privilege.
Show answer

D. The admission is information relating to the representation, so Rule 1.6 protects it. A subpoena alone does not authorize disclosure. The attorney should assert the privilege and may disclose only if a court orders it. The claim that a completed crime is unprotected is wrong: past wrongdoing is confidential, and the crime-fraud exceptions address only future or ongoing conduct that uses the lawyer's services. Model Rule 1.6

Conflicts of Interest

4. A lawyer represents a husband and wife in preparing reciprocal wills that leave everything to each other, with the couple's children as secondary beneficiaries. During the engagement, the husband privately tells the lawyer that he has a child from an affair and wants to leave that child a bequest without the wife knowing. The lawyer believes disclosing this to the wife is necessary to competently continue the joint representation, but the husband refuses to allow disclosure. May the lawyer continue representing both spouses in the estate planning matter?

  1. (A) Yes, because information received from one joint client is never confidential as to the other joint client in a common representation.
  2. (B) No, because the lawyer must withdraw from representing both spouses since the material information affecting the wife's interests cannot be withheld without impairing the joint representation.
  3. (C) Yes, because the lawyer may simply omit the bequest from the will without telling the wife anything.
  4. (D) No, because spousal joint representation in estate planning is always improper given the inherent conflict of interest.
Show answer

B. In a common representation, the lawyer owes each spouse a duty to share information material to the joint matter. The lawyer also owes the husband confidentiality. When the husband forbids disclosure of information the lawyer considers necessary to competently represent the wife, the conflict cannot be managed, and the lawyer must withdraw from the joint representation (Rules 1.4, 1.6, 1.7, 1.16). The choice saying joint-client information is never confidential overstates the law: absent a prior agreement to share, the lawyer may not simply disclose over the husband's objection, which is why withdrawal is the result. Model Rule 1.7

Competence, Legal Malpractice, and Other Civil Liability

5. An attorney accepted a case involving a complex area of securities regulation with which she had no prior experience. She spent extra hours researching the field, consulted a treatise, and briefly discussed strategy with a colleague who practiced securities law, but she did not associate co-counsel or tell the client she lacked experience in this area. Her handling of the matter met the standard of a competent practitioner and the client's interests were adequately protected. Is the attorney subject to discipline?

  1. (A) Yes, because she failed to disclose her lack of experience to the client before accepting the representation.
  2. (B) No, because a lawyer may acquire the necessary competence through reasonable preparation without prior experience in the field.
  3. (C) Yes, because she did not associate with a lawyer experienced in securities law.
  4. (D) No, because any lawyer licensed to practice is presumed competent in all areas of law.
Show answer

B. Under Rule 1.1 and its comments, a lawyer may take on an unfamiliar field if she gains the needed competence through reasonable study and preparation, which she did here. The Model Rules do not require a lawyer to associate co-counsel or to disclose inexperience when competence is achieved through preparation. Association with an experienced lawyer is only one way to become competent, not a requirement. Model Rule 1.1

Litigation and Other Forms of Advocacy

6. A defense lawyer in a civil case learns, only after her client testified truthfully at a deposition, that opposing counsel intends to call a witness whose testimony will likely be devastating but truthful. To gain a tactical advantage, the defense lawyer files numerous discovery motions and requests every possible extension, not because they are needed but solely to delay the trial date past the client's upcoming retirement to make the witness less available. Is the lawyer subject to discipline?

  1. (A) No, because filing discovery motions and seeking extensions are always proper litigation tactics.
  2. (B) No, because the lawyer is protecting the client's legitimate interest in delay.
  3. (C) Yes, because a lawyer must make reasonable efforts to expedite litigation consistent with the client's interests.
  4. (D) Yes, because a lawyer may never request an extension of a trial date.
Show answer

C. Rule 3.2 requires reasonable efforts to expedite litigation consistent with the client's interests. Delay pursued solely to frustrate the opponent, here by making a witness less available, is not a legitimate client interest. The choice calling the delay a legitimate client interest is wrong for that reason. The choice saying extensions may never be requested overstates the rule, because good-faith extensions are proper. Model Rule 3.2

Transactions and Communications with Persons Other Than Clients

7. Attorney represents a buyer in a commercial real estate deal. During negotiations, the seller's representative asks Attorney whether the buyer has financing already lined up. Attorney knows the buyer does not yet have financing approved, but responds, "My client is prepared to close quickly," intending to convey a false impression without technically lying. Is Attorney subject to discipline?

  1. (A) Yes, because Attorney made a statement that materially misleads the seller by implication even though no literal false statement of fact was made.
  2. (B) No, because Attorney never made an affirmative false statement of fact.
  3. (C) No, because statements made during arm's-length negotiations are never considered statements of fact under the rules.
  4. (D) Yes, because Attorney had an affirmative duty to disclose the buyer's lack of financing to the seller.
Show answer

A. A lawyer may not knowingly make a false statement of material fact to a third person. A deliberately misleading, partially true statement made in response to a direct question can qualify, as can conduct involving deceit. The tempting defense that no literally false statement was made fails because misrepresentation can occur by implication. The duty-to-disclose option is wrong because a lawyer generally has no affirmative duty to volunteer facts. The violation here comes from the deliberately deceptive answer, not from silence. Model Rule 4.1

Different Roles of the Lawyer

8. A lawyer represents a closely held corporation. During a meeting, the lawyer learns that the corporation's CFO is siphoning funds into a shell company, causing significant financial injury to the corporation. The lawyer reports this to the CFO's immediate supervisor, the CEO, but the CEO refuses to take any action and tells the lawyer to drop the matter. The lawyer reasonably believes the embezzlement is continuing and will cause substantial injury to the corporation. May the lawyer go over the CEO's head and report the matter to the board of directors?

  1. (A) No, because the lawyer's duty of confidentiality to the CEO prevents disclosure to the board.
  2. (B) No, because the lawyer represents the corporation, not the CEO, and has no authority to contact the board.
  3. (C) Yes, because the lawyer may refer the matter to a higher authority within the organization, including the board, when officers refuse to address conduct that will substantially injure the organization.
  4. (D) Yes, but only if the lawyer first withdraws from representing the corporation.
Show answer

C. The lawyer's client is the corporation. Under Rule 1.13(b), when an officer's conduct is likely to cause substantial injury to the organization, the lawyer refers the matter up the chain, including to the board, if lower officers fail to act. The confidentiality objection fails because the lawyer owes no personal confidentiality duty to the CEO that would bar reporting to the organization's highest authority. Rule 1.13 also does not require withdrawal before going up the ladder. Model Rule 1.13

Safekeeping Funds and Other Property

9. An attorney received a $10,000 settlement check on behalf of a client. The attorney deposited the check into her client trust account. The attorney's own fee, which the client had agreed was $3,000, was clearly earned and undisputed. The attorney left the entire $10,000 in the trust account for two months before disbursing any funds, using the trust account essentially as a general holding account for convenience. Is the attorney subject to discipline?

  1. (A) No, because the attorney owned the entire settlement amount once the check was deposited into her own trust account.
  2. (B) Yes, because the attorney was required to withdraw the earned fee promptly rather than leave it commingled with client funds.
  3. (C) No, because a lawyer may leave earned fees in the trust account indefinitely as a courtesy to the client.
  4. (D) Yes, because a lawyer may never deposit a settlement check into a trust account.
Show answer

B. Rule 1.15 requires client funds to be kept separate from the lawyer's own property, and once the lawyer's fee is earned and undisputed it must be withdrawn promptly; leaving it in the trust account is commingling. The lawyer also had to deliver the client's undisputed share promptly rather than park it for convenience. The claim that a lawyer owns a settlement once it is deposited is wrong, because deposit into a trust account signals that the funds belong to the client, or at least that the client has an interest in them. Model Rule 1.15

Communications About Legal Services

10. A lawyer's website states, "Our firm has recovered over $50 million for injured clients and we never lose a case we believe in." In fact the firm has lost several cases it took to trial. Is the lawyer subject to discipline for this website statement?

  1. (A) No, because the statement is mere puffery that no reasonable client would rely upon.
  2. (B) Yes, because lawyers may never state past results achieved for clients on a website.
  3. (C) No, because statements on a firm website are advertising and not subject to truthfulness requirements.
  4. (D) Yes, because the statement contains a material assertion that is false and likely to create unjustified expectations about results.
Show answer

D. Rule 7.1 bars false or misleading communications about a lawyer's services. The claim that the firm never loses a case it believes in is false, since it has lost trials, and it is likely to create unjustified expectations about results. The option saying past results may never be stated is wrong because truthful, non-misleading statements of past results are allowed. Only false or misleading ones are prohibited. Model Rule 7.1

Lawyers' Duties to the Public and the Legal System

11. A lawyer's annual income places her among the top earners in her state bar. She devotes her time exclusively to high-fee corporate work and does not perform any pro bono service, believing that paying a premium in taxes is a sufficient civic contribution. Is the lawyer subject to discipline for failing to perform pro bono work?

  1. (A) No, because pro bono service is an aspirational goal, not a mandatory duty subject to discipline.
  2. (B) Yes, because lawyers who can afford it have a heightened mandatory obligation to serve the poor.
  3. (C) Yes, because every lawyer must perform at least 50 hours of pro bono service each year.
  4. (D) No, because paying taxes satisfies the lawyer's professional responsibility to the public.
Show answer

A. Rule 6.1 states that lawyers should aspire to provide pro bono service. It is a professional responsibility but is not enforceable through discipline, so the lawyer is not subject to discipline. The choice claiming a mandatory 50-hour minimum is wrong because the 50-hour figure is only an aspirational benchmark. The choice saying tax payments satisfy the duty gives the wrong reason for the right result. Model Rule 6.1

Judicial Conduct

12. A judge's brother-in-law is a plaintiff in a personal injury suit assigned to the judge's docket. Neither party nor counsel knows of the relationship, and the judge does not think it will affect her judgment. Must the judge disclose the relationship or take further action?

  1. (A) No, because the judge sincerely believes she can remain impartial
  2. (B) No, because the relationship is not close enough to require action
  3. (C) Yes, because the judge must disclose the relationship on the record and likely disqualify herself absent remittal
  4. (D) Yes, because a judge may never preside over a case involving any relative regardless of disclosure
Show answer

C. Under Canon 2, a judge must disqualify herself when a person within the third degree of relationship to her or her spouse is a party, whatever she believes about her own impartiality. Because this ground is not personal bias, the judge may disclose it on the record and let the parties and lawyers consider remittal. The tempting answer that the judge may never preside over any relative's case is wrong on two counts: remittal is available, and the rule reaches only relatives within the specified degree. Judicial Conduct Canon 2