April 2016 LACBA MCLE Test and Answer Sheet

Test No. 256: 2015 Ethics Roundup

To access the article related to this test, please click here.
Instructions for Obtaining MCLE Credit

The Los Angeles County Bar Association certifies that this activity has been approved for Minimum Continuing Legal Education Ethics credit by the State Bar of California in the amount of 1 hour. To apply for credit, please follow the instructions.

1. Study the CLE article.

2. Answer the test questions by marking the appropriate boxes. Each question has only one answer.

3. Photocopies of this answer sheet may be submitted; however, this form should not be enlarged or reduced. Mail the answer sheet and the $20 testing fee ($25 for non-LACBA members) to:

Los Angeles Lawyer
P.O. Box 55020
Los Angeles, CA 90055

Make checks payable to Los Angeles Lawyer.

4. You can also fill in the test form and submit it directly to LACBA by clicking "Submit." To submit your test answers online you will need to pay by credit card. After submitting your answers you will be presented with a screen requesting payment information. This information will be submitted in a secure mode which will allow you to safely transmit your credit card number over the Internet. If you prefer not to pay by credit card, please print this answer sheet and submit your responses by regular mail.

5. Within six weeks, Los Angeles Lawyer will return your test with the correct answers, a rationale for the correct answers, and a certificate verifying the CLE credit you earned through this self-assessment activity.

6. For future reference, please retain the CLE test materials returned to you.


Test Sheet

Mark your answers to the test by clicking next to your choice.  All questions must be answered.  Each question has only one answer. This test is worth 1 hour of Ethics credit.*

1. Generally, standing to disqualify a lawyer for a conflict of interest is limited to a current or former client.

2. A conflict can arise with respect to a nonclient if a prior representation resulted in the disclosure of the nonclient’s privileged information, and there is a substantial relationship between the two matters.

3. A settlement officer in an unsuccessful settlement conference can later represent one of the parties if an ethical screen is created.

4. In a joint representation, the privilege belongs to both clients, and one cannot waive the privilege for the other.

5. In an action based on breach of a duty arising from the attorney-client relationship, one joint client can prevent the other client from using privileged communications against the lawyer.

6. Serving an inadequate privilege log waives the privilege.

7. No person can practice law in California unless he or she is a member of the California Bar, is admitted pro hac vice, or falls within an exception.

8. Submitting a pro hac vice application for approval is sufficient to practice law in California.

9. Evidence of communications during a mediation cannot be introduced in evidence, whether directly or by inference.

10. Before suing a lawyer and the lawyer’s client for conspiracy, a plaintiff must obtain an order determining that there is a reasonable probability of prevailing.

11. Section 340.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure bars all stale claims against an attorney, whether or not they arise from a breach of his or her professional obligations.

12. The statute of limitations for a claim against an attorney is not tolled if the client possesses sufficient facts to give rise to a duty of inquiry.

13. A client can rely on his lawyer to discharge the duty of inquiry.

14. To avoid the anti-SLAPP statute, the acts complained of must be criminal, not merely violations of a statute.

15. If the acts complained of are protected by the litigation privilege, a plaintiff cannot show a probability of prevailing.

16. A line of California authority holds that the anti-SLAPP statute does not apply to legal malpractice actions brought by a former client.

17. The anti-SLAPP statute does not contain an exception for legal malpractice actions.

18. California’s Rules of Professional Conduct require a lawyer to allow a client with diminished capacity to make fundamental decisions regarding the engagement.

19. An attorney lacking the technical knowledge and ability for a particular matter must decline the representation.

20. When withdrawing from an engagement, a lawyer may reveal client secrets in camera or under seal.


Before clicking the Submit button, please verify that all questions have been answered. An error message will appear if not all questions are answered.

* The Los Angeles County Bar Association has been approved as a continuing legal education provider of Minimum Continuing Legal Education credit by the State Bar of California. This self-assessment activity will qualify for Minimum Continuing Legal Education legal ethics credit by the State Bar of California in the amount of one hour.