Mariline Marcelino-Lee
I.
LLB4301
Mariline Marcelino-Lee
II.
LLB4301
Mariline Marcelino-Lee
and that what led to the commission of the crime was because he wanted to
protect Kelly and himself, it is no excuse for him to let her lie to the police
about it.
4. Cite the ethical violations committed by Leo Drummond in the film.
Drummond is a very expensive skillful lawyer but violates legal ethics, among
which I have noticed are:
- He does not know Rudy Baylor but he vouches for him to try the case.
- He connived with the judge to pressure Rudy to settle.
- He arranged for the key witnesses to be paid and be fired from the
company before the deposition.
- He tapped Rudys phone and bugged his office
All these contradicts the mandate that a lawyer shall at all times uphold the
integrity and dignity of the legal profession and conduct himself with
courtesy, fairness and candor toward his professional colleagues.
5. Discuss the ethical import of the exclusion of the documents provided by
Jackie Lemancyzk (i.e., the employee who was forced to resign from Great
Benefit).
Jackie Lemancyzks senior claims manual has a section which is not available
in the senior claims manual presented in court. When Rudy tried to examine
Jackie regarding the said manual and other documents, the defense moved
for them to be struck from the proceeding as they were allegedly stolen work
papers. The exclusion was just proper not only because it was not timely
offered but also because presenting stolen documents is a manifestation of
disregard to courtesy, fairness, candor, which a lawyer is expected to conduct
himself with. Subsequently, however, Rudy was able to examine the CEO of
Great Benefits based on the said documents as Rudy was able to present to
the court jurisprudence dictating that stolen documents are admissible if the
lawyers played no part in the theft.
The defense could have insisted on their objection as the questioned
documents were not proffered on time, which they probably opted not to do
so for they took part in concealing this document and Jackie Lemancyzk from
the court. This is a clear manifestation of the suppression of facts and
concealment of a witness capable of establishing the facts of the case.
6. Comment on Leo Drummond as a lawyer. Compare him to Ed Concannon (of
The Verdict). Are they good lawyers?
Leo Drummond and Ed Concannon are of the same feather. They are both
well-equipped lawyers but they use their skills only to gain victory and
LLB4301
Mariline Marcelino-Lee
prestige without regards to the very purpose of the legal profession which is
to aid the judiciary in providing justice to those who deserve it.
7. Give your commentary on the closing statement of the film:
"Every lawyer, at least once in every case, feels himself crossing
a line that he doesn't really mean to cross... it just happens... and
if you cross it enough times it disappears forever. And then your
nothing but another lawyer joke. Just another shark in the dirty
water."
This commentary is analogous to the anecdote of the boiling frog
which describes a frog slowly being boiled alive. The premise is
that if a frog is placed in boiling water, it will jump out, but if it is
placed in cold water that is slowly heated, it will not perceive the
danger and will be cooked to death. The anecdote is often used to
demonstrate that when people frequently, either willingly or
unwillingly, do things they should not do, they ended up being
past feeling about it to the point that they totally become without
principles.
Lawyers, especially the new ones, like Rudy Baylor, would think
that committing a violation of a little of this and that would not
really make them less of a lawyer that the society expect them to
be and would even rationalize that their improper action was
necessary to obtain the justice they are fighting for. Little do they
know that committing a violation once would lead them to
committing it again and again till they lose sight of all the
righteousness and ethics that they ought to manifest in their legal
professions.
Bonus:
Feel free to give other inputs/insights you may have on the ethical and ethicsrelated issues presented in the film.
Legal ethics and professional responsibility is more than just a subject that one
should pass in the bar examination. It is something that people in the legal
profession should bear in mind as they perform their duty of being servant of the
law. Indeed, it is not easy as depicted in this film, because lawyers could often get to
a cross-road where they are forced to choose between doing what is ethical and
protecting their own interest. Making the right choice even gets harder when you
see that almost everyone in the legal practice shamelessly conducts themselves
unethically. In this movie, Rudy Baylor was not only exposed to lawyers without
ethics but also encountered a judge who palpably colluded with his opponent just to
settle the case. It is really unimaginably difficult for a lawyer not to succumb to all
LLB4301
Mariline Marcelino-Lee
these temptations. Nevertheless, the code of ethics is the very law of the legal
standards and professionalism which all lawyers are bound to respect. Hence, it
must always be obeyed and carefully depicted by all the people in the legal practice.
LLB4301