thinking critically about ethics

Graded Project Thinking Critically About Ethics

Graded Project Thinking Critically About Ethics

Introduction

The National Federation of Paralegal System (NFPA) is a very well known organization who has comprised paralegal association of individual and throughout the Canada and United States. They have their own job responsibilities that reflecting the diversity if parallel profession. This is also the responsibility of NFPA paralegal association that every individual legal supervisor does not break the law and perform their duties under given considerations (Zoubek, 2012, p. 26). On the other hand, ABA Models Rules settled by America Bar Association (ABA) for setting the rules according to the standards lawyer’s professional responsibilities and legal ethics in United States of America.

Discussion

In this paper, I will review activities throughout the week and identify where Carl and Attorney Howe violate the ethical considerations according to ABA Models rules and NFPA ethical considerations.

Monday

On the first day when Jane says, she has a side business on the side, and she didn’t pay taxes because the government does not know about it, Carl failed and avoided the ABA MR Rule 2.1; NFPA Rule EC-1.3(a) which is stated that, lawyer must be an independent lawyer and advice candidate according to justice but on that particular time Carl does not provide any instruction to Jane smith about the violation of ABA and NFPA rules. Furthermore, according to ABA MR 5.5(b); NFPA EC 1.7 (a) Carl also failed to identify himself as a paralegal

Tuesday

The actual meeting between Carl and Jane were around one hour and twenty minutes, but Carl wrote it as two hours, Carl violated the ABA MR Rule 1.5(1); NFPA Rule EC-1.2 (c), a paralegal should keep the proper record accurate and complete and must not charge an extra fee or unreasonable expenses with their clients.

Wednesday

Carl violated rules which are relates to former clients according to ABA MR Rule 1.9 and NFPA Rule EC-1.5 (c) when he advice Zeke that “you may have to sue Jane Smith”. This is not appropriate behavior of honest lawyer with former clients because a lawyer who is formerly represent one client that there is no matter that represent another person for the same substantial matter until former client give authority to make consent or confirmed in writing. Carl should not be over record in the aim of benefit for a third person.

Thursday

Carl violated ABA MR Rule 5.5 (a); NFPA Rule EC-1.8 (a) unlawful practice of law when he say Sally brown “if you did not see the accident, then we may not able to win the case” such word is totally against the ethical consideration that practice by Carl just aim for winning the case. A paralegal shall comply all the legal practice that given by the governing authority and must avoid unconstitutional practice of law in the jurisdiction towards the paralegal practice”.

Friday

Attorney Howe violated the ABA MR Rule 5.1 (a); NFPA Rule EC-1.6 (f) when he says that, ‘Carl, we are little short this week. I will write a check of client trust account and can replace it next week when I get that big settlement check and just not tell to anyone”...