MPRE — Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam — All Questions
11 questions
Under Model Rule 1.1, competent representation requires:
- a.A guarantee that the client will win
- b.Board certification as a specialist
- c.The knowledge, skill, and preparation reasonably necessary✓
- d.At least ten years of experience in the field
Rule 1.1 says "competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation." The comment adds that a lawyer need not have special training or prior experience.
A lawyer violates a Rule of Professional Conduct. Under the Scope section of the Model Rules, that violation:
- a.Requires the client to be paid treble damages
- b.Does not by itself create a cause of action✓
- c.Bars the client from ever suing the lawyer
- d.Automatically establishes civil malpractice liability
The Scope section states that "violation of a Rule should not itself give rise to a cause of action against a lawyer nor should it create any presumption in such a case that a legal duty has been breached," though a violation may be evidence of the standard of conduct and may lead to discipline.
What four elements does Model Rule 1.1 say competent representation requires?
- a.Experience, certification, specialization, and insurance.
- b.Training, supervision, mentoring, and testing.
- c.Diligence, loyalty, candor, and confidentiality.
- d.Knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and preparation reasonably necessary.✓
Rule 1.1 states that "competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation."
A lawyer hears from a stranger in an emergency room that he will be jailed tomorrow unless someone files a paper tonight. The lawyer does not practice criminal law and no one else is available. What may she do?
- a.Help only if the man signs a malpractice waiver.
- b.Give only the help the emergency requires.✓
- c.Nothing, because she lacks criminal-law competence.
- d.Take over the whole criminal defense.
The comment to Rule 1.1 permits emergency assistance where "referral to or consultation or association with another lawyer would be impractical," but says it "should be limited to that reasonably necessary in the circumstances."
According to the comment to Rule 1.1, maintaining competence includes keeping up with which of the following?
- a.The fee rates of competing lawyers.
- b.Only changes in statutes.
- c.Technology's benefits and risks.✓
- d.Only court rules in the lawyer's county.
The comment says a lawyer "should keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, including the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology," and engage in continuing study and education.
A lawyer has handled several unrelated matters for a client over many years. After finishing the last one, she wants to make clear she is no longer representing the client. What does the comment to Rule 1.3 recommend?
- a.Sending the client's file to the state bar.
- b.Refunding all fees from the last matter.
- c.Clarify its status, preferably in writing.✓
- d.Nothing, because the relationship ends automatically.
The comment to Rule 1.3 notes that a long-time client "sometimes may assume that the lawyer will continue to serve," and "doubt about whether a client-lawyer relationship still exists should be clarified by the lawyer, preferably in writing."
Opposing counsel asks for a two-week extension to answer a complaint. Granting it will not prejudice the lawyer's client. May the lawyer agree?
- a.No, unless the client consents in writing.
- b.Yes, but only if the court orders it.
- c.Yes, because a reasonable postponement is consistent with diligence.✓
- d.No, because diligence requires pressing every advantage.
The comment to Rule 1.3 says the duty of promptness "does not preclude the lawyer from agreeing to a reasonable request for a postponement that will not prejudice the lawyer's client," and a lawyer "is not bound, however, to press for every advantage."
In most jurisdictions, may the intended beneficiary of a negligently drafted will sue the drafting lawyer even though she was not his client?
- a.Yes, but only if she paid the fee.
- b.Yes, as an intended beneficiary.✓
- c.No, because the estate owns any claim.
- d.No, because only clients may sue for malpractice.
In *Lucas v. Hamm*, the California Supreme Court held that "intended beneficiaries of a will who lose their testamentary rights because of failure of the attorney who drew the will to properly fulfill his obligations" may recover.
A lawyer practices in a limited-liability partnership. Does the entity form shield her from liability for her own malpractice?
- a.No, she stays liable for her own conduct.✓
- b.No, because lawyers may not use limited-liability entities.
- c.Yes, because the partnership is liable instead.
- d.Yes, if the client signed the engagement letter.
The comment to Rule 1.8 says the rule does not limit practicing "in the form of a limited-liability entity, where permitted by law, provided that each lawyer remains personally liable to the client for his or her own conduct."
Which agreement is prohibited by Rule 1.8(h) unless the client is independently represented?
- a.An agreement to arbitrate malpractice claims, fully explained.
- b.An agreement settling an existing claim with a represented client.
- c.An agreement limiting the scope of the representation.
- d.An agreement capping the lawyer's future malpractice liability.✓
Rule 1.8(h)(1) forbids "an agreement prospectively limiting the lawyer's liability to a client for malpractice unless the client is independently represented in making the agreement." Informed arbitration clauses and scope limits are treated differently.
Want these explained in order? MPRE Study Guide — 2026 Edition — PDF + EPUB, $24.99 · 14-day refund →
A criminal defendant claims ineffective assistance of counsel. Under *Strickland v. Washington*, what must he show?
- a.That counsel violated a disciplinary rule.
- b.Only that he was convicted.
- c.Deficiency plus prejudice.✓
- d.Only that counsel made a mistake.
*Strickland* requires the defendant to show "that counsel's performance was deficient" and "that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense." A mistake or conviction alone is not enough.