Certified Legal Professional (CLP) Practice Exam

Disable ads (and more) with a membership for a one time $2.99 payment

Prepare for the Certified Legal Professional Exam with our comprehensive study materials. Enhance your legal knowledge with multiple choice questions and quiz formats that offer insights and explanations. Ace your CLP exam with confidence!

Each practice test/flash card set has 50 randomly selected questions from a bank of over 500. You'll get a new set of questions each time!

Practice this question and more.


Is the attorney subject to discipline for disclosing a construction company's misrepresentation to the insurer?

  1. No, because the attorney was permitted to disclose the construction company's misrepresentation to the insurer to protect it from prejudice

  2. No, because the insurer retained and paid the attorney, and so disclosure was allowable

  3. Yes, because the attorney's actions breached client confidentiality

  4. Yes, because the attorney should have communicated only with the construction company

The correct answer is: Yes, because the attorney should have communicated only with the construction company

The correct answer states that the attorney is subject to discipline due to breaching client confidentiality. In legal practice, attorneys are bound by strict rules regarding client confidentiality. When an attorney learns of a client's wrongdoing, such as misrepresentation in this case, they are typically obligated to maintain confidentiality unless there are specific exceptions in the law or ethical guidelines that allow for disclosure. Confidential information includes any information related to the representation of a client, and disclosing any such information without proper justification can lead to disciplinary actions against the attorney. The attorney's primary responsibility is to maintain the trust and loyalty of their client, which is critical to the attorney-client relationship. Thus, revealing the construction company's misrepresentation to the insurer breaches that confidentiality. The other options suggest that disclosure might have been acceptable under certain circumstances, such as protecting the insurer from prejudice or because the insurer paid for the attorney's services. However, these arguments do not sufficiently address the confidentiality obligation that the attorney has towards the construction company. Additionally, the assertion that the attorney should have communicated only with the construction company emphasizes that communication related to such misrepresentation is typically restricted to the client in order to uphold the integrity of the attorney-client relationship.