An attorney represented a company on transactional matters. After the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) advised the company that it was the subject of an investigation, the company asked the attorney if the attorney would represent it in the SEC investigation. The attorney declined to do so and the company retained other counsel. Nonetheless, from time to time, the company's representatives asked the attorney legal questions about the SEC investigation and the attorney provided off-the-cuff answers. Does the attorney have a lawyer-client relationship with the company for purposes of the SEC investigation?

a. Yes, because the attorney answered the company's legal questions when the attorney knew or reasonably should have known that the company would reasonably rely on the attorney's answers.
b. Yes, because the attorney previously represented company in its transactional work.
c. No, because the attorney declined to represent company in the SEC investigation.
d. No, because the company did not pay the attorney to represent it in the SEC matter.

Question

Irvin3968 Irvin3968

03-02-2020
Law

contestada

An attorney represented a company on transactional matters. After the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) advised the company that it was the subject of an investigation, the company asked the attorney if the attorney would represent it in the SEC investigation. The attorney declined to do so and the company retained other counsel. Nonetheless, from time to time, the company's representatives asked the attorney legal questions about the SEC investigation and the attorney provided off-the-cuff answers. Does the attorney have a lawyer-client relationship with the company for purposes of the SEC investigation?

a. Yes, because the attorney answered the company's legal questions when the attorney knew or reasonably should have known that the company would reasonably rely on the attorney's answers.
b. Yes, because the attorney previously represented company in its transactional work.
c. No, because the attorney declined to represent company in the SEC investigation.
d. No, because the company did not pay the attorney to represent it in the SEC matter.

Respuesta :

Otras preguntas

2y +6=3y+8 Verify it and explain step by step?

A significant drop in performance in cognitive areas such as memory and reading may __________.

r(x)=x-3 s(x)= 4x²write the expressions for (s+r)(x) and (s-r(x) and evaluate (s.r)(2)

Please help it would mean so much!! 4x-3(x-2)=21

Select all the correct answers. According to Newton’s law of universal gravitation, which statements are true? As we move to higher altitudes, the force of gra

To drive defensively, you should _______________.A. concentrate all your attention on the car in front of you B. look ahead and keep your eyes moving C. expect

Solve the equation below for x.| 2(x+5)= 3(x-4)

If you answer parts one and 2 ill give you brainiest and 30 points

The recursive rule for a sequence is a^n=a^(n-1)+7,where a^1=-15. What is the explicit rule for this sequence?

Find the missing side length,m

Surnia Surnia · Answer 1 · 2020-02-06T07:18:10+01:00

Answer: a. Yes, because the attorney answered the company's legal questions when the attorney knew or reasonably should have known that the company would reasonably rely on the attorney's answers.

Explanation:

The company attorney has changed because the attorney declined to conduction the investigation. But the company representatives may ask the attorney the legal questions as the attorney is knowledgeable in legal matters and the attorney must provide the answers because the attorneys actions should be sufficient and informative to retain the lawyer-client relationship although the attorney may not participate in a particular project or investigation she/he is liable to give information. The company would also rely on the attorney's answers.