Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam Practice Question
Morgan’s client wishes to delay a scheduled hearing for personal convenience. Morgan files identical motions to reschedule the matter multiple times, knowing there is no further legal or strategic justification to do so. What is the best assessment of her conduct?
Multiple motions to postpone without a legitimate reason violate professional obligations
Delays are acceptable if the opposing side has not challenged them
Filing repeated delay requests is ethically justified when the client finds them helpful
This is typical throughout the process of litigation
A lawyer should promote efficient progress of a matter and refrain from actions that cause needless delay. Postponements are not legitimate if they lack a substantial justification. Filing multiple requests based on personal convenience alone undermines the duty to move a proceeding forward in a timely manner. A permissible ground for delay typically involves legitimate legal or strategic reasons that advance the client’s interests under professional standards. The incorrect answers fail because a client’s preference or an opposing party’s stance does not relieve a lawyer of the obligation to expedite litigation whenever possible. Lawyers remain personally responsible for ensuring their actions align with ethical guidelines regarding timely progression of proceedings.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
What are the ethical obligations of a lawyer regarding delays in litigation?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What constitutes a legitimate reason for delaying a hearing?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are the consequences of unethical conduct by a lawyer in delaying cases?