Certified Legal Professional (CLP) Practice Exam

When might an attorney not be obligated to inform a client of a risky investment?

1. When the client explicitly asks for advice

2. When the attorney believes the investment is sound

3. When the client has prior experience in investments

4. When the attorney's duty lies only in legal matters

The correct answer is: When the client explicitly asks for advice

The scenario where an attorney might not be obligated to inform a client of a risky investment is most accurately represented by the context where the client explicitly asks for advice. When a client directly solicits information or recommendations about a specific investment, the attorney's obligation typically hinges on the nature of the inquiry. In this situation, if the client is seeking advice but specifically requests information about an investment without a tendency to delve into the risks associated, the attorney might reasonably interpret this as an understanding that the client is willing to assume responsibility for the investment's inherent risks. This differentiation is crucial when considering the professional boundaries of legal advice versus financial counsel. The attorney’s responsibility is generally confined to providing legal guidance rather than exhaustive financial advisories, thus potentially allowing for a more limited disclosure about investment risks if specifically probed. The other points present scenarios where an attorney’s obligation varies, but they don’t encapsulate the distinct interaction and explicit nature of the client’s request that aids in delineating the attorney's responsive duties. Therefore, the client’s explicit requests play a significant role in shaping the extent of the attorney's communicative obligations concerning risky investments.