Peter is a paralegal who works for a go-getter, up-and-coming young attorney. As a perk, and demonstration of his capabilities, one of the Junior Partners has assigned Peter's attorney a "could-be" difficult case. Peter has worked on a similar matter, so he feels that the attorney can complete the task efficiently and effectively. The young lawyer feels the same way. But the young attorney does not want to finish it too quickly and not build billable hours. The young attorney has asked Peter to slow things down and perform more billable electronic research even though Peter already has some in his file on the topic. Speaking of topics, the young attorney wants Peter to fill in for him at a couple of upcoming court dates. What should Peter do regarding all of these ethical dilemmas?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

As a paralegal, Peter's conduct is not directly dictated by the guidelines of the code of ethics governing attorneys, including the young attorney, in this jurisdiction. However, past rulings of the state's Supreme Court have imputed some of the lawyer ethics to paralegals working under the supervision of an attorney. If Peter is a member of a voluntary professional paralegal organization that does in fact have guidelines for its members, he could lose his membership or advanced credential. Those guidelines and those of the attorney's code of ethics would strongly infer that the conduct requested by his supervising attorney is in violation of acceptable standards of conduct by legal professionals. Charging a client for work that is not necessary to resolve their legal matter should never be done, and Peter should remind the young attorney of this ethical violation. If Peter is not successful in convincing his supervising attorney of the potential for malpractice, then Peter must go to the assigning Junior Partner or Paralegal Manager with his concern. Peter will most certainly run afoul of UPL if he agrees to "fill-in" for the lawyer in court.