An MPRE-appropriate Story
Like many third years, I took the Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam (MPRE) last Saturday. The exam tests one's knowledge of the ethical and moral rules that bind lawyers. Somewhat distressingly, the most stringent state bars usually only require a D+ on this exam to deem you sufficiently ethical to practice law.
Lawyers are fairly unique in that we're a largely self-regulated profession. Our clients can sue us for malpractice, and the state can bring criminal prosecutions against us like anyone else, but the primary regulatory body any lawyer answers to is their state bar. Lawyers make the rules that lawyers have to live by. This seems fairly sketchy at first blush, but for the most part the rules promulgated for lawyers and judges to follow tend to make sense, or at least avoid appearing purely arbitrary.
At the very least, we're a lot less self-dealing than we could be, which is a victory for self-restraint in a field that, as a rule, doesn't practice restraint in any way. For an example of what the legal profession's ethical rules could have been, I found this:
"In 1874, Francis Evans Cornish, while acting as a magistrate in Winnipeg, Canada, had to try himself on a charge of being drunk in public. He convicted himself and fined himself five dollars with costs. But then he stated for the record: “Francis Evans Cornish, taking into consideration past good behaviour, your fine is remitted”."
Magistrate Cornish cut quite an interesting figure. He had previously served a stint as Mayor of London, during which Mr. Cornish was fined eight dollars for attacking a British commander boasting of an affair with Cornish's wife. Cornish went on to be elected the first Mayor of Winnipeg, beating his rival by a vote of 383 to 179, a truly remarkable achievement in a town with only 382 eligible voters.
God bless this noble profession...
Lawyers are fairly unique in that we're a largely self-regulated profession. Our clients can sue us for malpractice, and the state can bring criminal prosecutions against us like anyone else, but the primary regulatory body any lawyer answers to is their state bar. Lawyers make the rules that lawyers have to live by. This seems fairly sketchy at first blush, but for the most part the rules promulgated for lawyers and judges to follow tend to make sense, or at least avoid appearing purely arbitrary.
At the very least, we're a lot less self-dealing than we could be, which is a victory for self-restraint in a field that, as a rule, doesn't practice restraint in any way. For an example of what the legal profession's ethical rules could have been, I found this:
"In 1874, Francis Evans Cornish, while acting as a magistrate in Winnipeg, Canada, had to try himself on a charge of being drunk in public. He convicted himself and fined himself five dollars with costs. But then he stated for the record: “Francis Evans Cornish, taking into consideration past good behaviour, your fine is remitted”."
Magistrate Cornish cut quite an interesting figure. He had previously served a stint as Mayor of London, during which Mr. Cornish was fined eight dollars for attacking a British commander boasting of an affair with Cornish's wife. Cornish went on to be elected the first Mayor of Winnipeg, beating his rival by a vote of 383 to 179, a truly remarkable achievement in a town with only 382 eligible voters.
God bless this noble profession...