Certified Legal Professional (CLP) Practice Exam

Was the attorney disciplined for interviewing jurors post-verdict in an employment discrimination case?

1. Yes, because ex parte communications with jurors are not permitted

2. No, because the rules do not regulate communications with jurors after a proceeding is over

3. No, because the communication was cordial and truthful

4. Yes, because the judge did not expressly permit the communication

The correct answer is: No, because the communication was cordial and truthful

The best answer to the question revolves around the rules governing communications with jurors after a verdict has been reached. In most jurisdictions, attorneys are typically allowed to communicate with jurors once the trial has concluded and the verdict has been rendered. This is primarily because the judicial process has been completed, and jurors are no longer considered part of a deliberative body. As such, the content and nature of the conversation—being cordial and truthful—does not inherently violate any regulations or ethical standards, as long as it does not involve an attempt to influence or intimidate the jurors. The other options focus on various restrictions that apply either during or prior to the conclusion of a trial, but these do not apply after a verdict is rendered. Therefore, the critical element here is that post-verdict communication is generally permissible, which supports the idea that the attorney was not disciplined solely for having a respectful dialogue with jurors after the case was concluded.