Certified Legal Professional (CLP) Practice Exam

What consequence does Attorney face for his statements regarding the ice cream parlor's profitability?

1. He is disciplined for false statement of fact

2. He faces no consequences since he represented Seller

3. He is fined for misleading advertising

4. He is required to refund the buyer’s money

The correct answer is: He faces no consequences since he represented Seller

The situation revolves around the consequences faced by an attorney for statements made about the profitability of a business—specifically, an ice cream parlor. The context suggests that the attorney represented the seller in the transaction. In this role, the attorney's primary responsibility is to advocate for the seller's interests, which typically involves promoting the business's strengths and potential profitability to attract buyers. In cases where an attorney is representing their client, they may provide statements or opinions that support their client's position. If the attorney firmly believes in the statements regarding the ice cream parlor's profitability and these statements do not constitute a knowingly false claim, it may be argued that the attorney is simply conducting their duty to represent the seller effectively. Consequently, unless it is established that the attorney's statements were intentionally misleading or made in bad faith, there may not be consequences for the attorney's actions. Therefore, in this scenario, it's plausible that the attorney faces no repercussions because they were acting within their role as a representative of the seller, emphasizing their duty to advocate without misrepresentation. This understanding provides a framework for justifying why there may not be disciplinary action against the attorney given the nature of their representation and the context in which the statements were made.