Famous Televised Court Trials Discussion

December 2, 2022

Famous Televised Court Trials Discussion

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

Famous Televised Court Trials Discussion

[Order Now]

Please make corrections to this assignment as per the uploaded file.

Facts of the case

Frasier is a renowned criminal defense attorney who has been appearing on a televised show to talk about the trial commentary involving the murder of a former football star. One afternoon, she appeared on a live talk show with other three attorneys to discuss the general state of law. The panel was required to take calls and respond to the caller’s issues and questions. Then, a young woman named Daphne called and directed her question to all the lawyers on the panel. However, Frasier interrupted and said that she is the most qualified to help Daphne.

She requested her to call her office to get an appointment because the matter required more detailed advice that could not be given on the talk show or over the phone. At the end of the program, Frasier thanked the news director with two front-row tickets to the most popular play in the town. She told him that he had helped him get many new clients after he held an interview with her the previous week.

Issues

Did Frasier violate the standards of professional responsibility by using a televised show to solicit clients and by interrupting the call made by Daphne to discredit the other attorneys and proceeding to request the client to call her office for an appointment? The gifts?

Rules

Model rule 7.2 (c) states that “a lawyer shall not state or imply that a lawyer is certified as a specialist in a particular field of law, unless the lawyer has been certified as a specialist by an organization that has been approved by an appropriate authority of the state or the District of Columbia or a U.S. Territory or that has been accredited by the American Bar Association; and the name of the certifying organization is clearly identified in the communication.”

Model rule 7.2 (b) states that “a lawyer shall not compensate, give or promise anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer’s services except that a lawyer may give nominal gifts as an expression of appreciation that are neither intended nor reasonably expected to be a form of compensation for recommending a lawyer’s services.

Additionally, model rule 7.3(a) states that “Solicitation” or “solicit” denotes a communication initiated by or on behalf of a lawyer or law firm that is directed to a specific person the lawyer knows or reasonably should know needs legal services in a particular matter and that offers to provide, or reasonably can be understood as offering to provide, legal services for that matter.”

According to model rule 6.1(b) (3), a lawyer should aspire to render at least (50) hours of pro bono publico legal services per year. In fulfilling this responsibility, the lawyer should participate in activities for improving the law, the legal system or the legal profession.”

In the matter of Dannitte Mays Dickey (S.C. Supreme Court, 2012), the lawyer was reprimanded for violating model rules 7.2 (a), 7.2(b), 7.2(c) based on statements posted on his website. He published information that violated standards of professional responsibility as a way of marketing his law firm through the website. He included statements that compared his services with that of other lawyers and created unjustified expectations among the clients. The statements in his website had material misrepresentation and omission of facts that could justify his expertise in that field of law.

Analysis

Frasier used the television live show to solicit a client. She told Daphne that she should contact her office and even gave the contacts. This is a violation of model rule 7.3(a) which bars lawyers from engaging in communication directed to a specific person the lawyer knows or reasonably should know needs legal services in a particular matter and that offers to provide, or reasonably can be understood as offering to provide, legal services for that matter. She knew Daphne needed legal advice and therefore she proceeded to convince her to take her legal advice. This is a form of solicitation.

Additionally, she violated model rule 6.1(b) (3), which requires that lawyers should offer free services by participating in activities that would improve the legal profession or the legal system. She was invited on the talk show to help address the callers’ questions for free. However, she took the chance to solicit a client and invite her to her office. She would then proceed to ask for legal fees from the client for services she should have offered for free.

Lawyers are barred from compensating or giving gifts that would be of value to someone who recommended their legal services according to model rule 7.2 (b). However, Frasier gave two tickets to the news director at the TV station as a form of appreciation.Tell why just tickets are ok but not the tickets she gave. She thanked the news director for allowing her to be on the show during a previous interview and she has been getting new clients.

Frasier also violated model rule 7.2(c) because she implied that she is a specialist in a certain field of law. She told Daphne that she was the most qualified attorney to answer her questions because she has extensive criminal trial experience. She added that she is an expert in the criminal trial field. Explain a bit more

[Order Now]

Conclusion

Yes, Frasier violated the standards of professional responsibility by engaging in solicitation of a client through a TV live show. She also implied that she is a specialist in the field of criminal trials which is against the professional conduct of lawyers. Therefore, disciplinary action can be initiated against her for violated the model rules of professional responsibility. tickets

Reference

In the matter of Dannitte Mays Dickey 768 S.E.2d 669, 2012. Supreme Court of South Carolina. Retrieved from https://law.justia.com/cases/south-carolina/supreme-court/2012/27090.html

Famous Televised Court Trials Discussion

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.