Ethics should be understood as one of the main branches of philosophy which typically deal with the study of morals. The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy 244-249 (Robert Audi ed., 1998). Morals, or morality, is a term that is frequently used in an interchangeable sense, pertaining to what is either right or wrong in any given situation or circumstance. Id. Sometimes, the term “ethical” is used as an adjective in a positive sense; the author implying that something or someone’s actions are “right,”

Is the lawyer’s plan ethical?
Ethics should be understood as one of the main branches of philosophy which typically deal with the study of
morals. The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy 244-249 (Robert Audi ed., 1998). Morals, or morality, is a term that is
frequently used in an interchangeable sense, pertaining to what is either right or wrong in any given situation or
circumstance. Id. Sometimes, the term “ethical” is used as an adjective in a positive sense; the author implying that
something or someone’s actions are “right,” based on the description of the circumstance/s. Thus, when we ask the
question: Is the lawyer’s plan ethical? We are in fact inquiring about whether the lawyer’s plan was right? With this
question in mind, I must assert that the lawyer’s plan was unethical, but let me explain.
First, the lawyer never should have approached me for advice. The lawyer approaching me was unethical. The
lawyer has three particular duties and/or roles to fulfill that are essential to his/her function as a lawyer. These duties are
“the lawyer as fiduciary, the lawyer as an officer of the court functioning in an adversarial system, and the lawyer as an
individual with personal values and interests.” Crystal Giesel, Professional Responsibility Problems of Practice and the
Profession 1 (7 th ed. 2020). Within the lawyer’s duty to be a fiduciary, we can clearly see the desire to be an advocate for
the lawyer’s client. However, we also see that the lawyer is supposed to be receive all information obtained in relation to
the lawyer’s services and keep that information confidential. One of the necessary rules within the notion of fiduciary is
the “duty of confidentiality”. Id. at 2. When the lawyer came to me seeking advice, he “spilled the beans” in a proverbial
sense; revealing to me all the details regarding his client’s case. This thought is confirmed by Scott E. Thompson, in his
ethical paper comparing the Model Rules with the biblical book of Proverbs. In this paper, Thompson utilizes the Model
Rule 1.6: “A lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed
consent…” Scott E. Thompson, The Model Rules of Professional Conduct Through the Lens of the Proverbs 50, Faculty
Publications and Presentations (2011), https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/lusol_fac_pubs/50. He has failed his duty here
first and foremost.
Second, the lawyer’s actions are considered unethical as defined by Model Rule 8.4. This rule states, “engage in
conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation” and “state or imply an ability to influence improperly a
government agency or official or to achieve results by means that violate the Rules of Professional Conduct or other law.”
Scott E. Thompson, The Model Rules of Professional Conduct Through the Lens of the Proverbs 50, Faculty Publications
and Presentations (2011), https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/lusol_fac_pubs/50. Hiring the private investigator for the
purpose of having the investigator lie as to his intentions (pretending to be someone else, with different credentials and
expertise) to acquire unlawfully the wife’s computer, is highly unethical.

What advice do you give him?
I would tell him to not discuss any additional details of this case with me; thereby keeping with the lawyer’s duty to
confidentiality. Crystal Giesel, Professional Responsibility Problems of Practice and the Profession 2 (7 th ed. 2020). Next, I
would tell him he needs to seek the assistance of law-enforcement and/or a court order to acquire the electronic
equipment from the client’s wife. If the lawyer had a strong suspicion that the client’s wife could have created the emails
or in some way is responsible for the emails being sent, he has a duty as an advocate for his client to attempt to acquire
the evidence via lawful and just means. This is a requirement consistent with the lawyer’s duty: “A lawyer shall act with
reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client.” Scott E. Thompson, The Model Rules of Professional
Conduct Through the Lens of the Proverbs 50, Faculty Publications and Presentations
(2011), https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/lusol_fac_pubs/50.
Would your answer change from the perspective of a biblical worldview?
My answer would not change from a perspective of a biblical worldview. My answer flows out from or is the result
of a biblical worldview. “For the Lord is a God of justice” and “all His ways are justice.” Isaiah 30:18 (ESV)
and Deuteronomy 32:4 (ESV). Therefore, my actions should attempt to mimic the nature of my God. The Christian (the
individual who adopts a biblical worldview) naturally adopts a “philosophy of morality” approach to lawyering. Crystal
Giesel, Professional Responsibility Problems of Practice and the Profession 22 (7 th ed. 2020). The Christian will incorporate
actions that are consistent with biblical morality. In hiring a private investigator to manipulate the client’s wife, the advice
and actions of myself and the lawyer would be entirely deceitful, dishonest, and would demonstrate unethical behavior. A
secular humanistic worldview with an entirely subjective and relativistic view of truth. Relativism is the “view that there is
no absolute and necessary truth, but all knowledge is relative to each subject.” John M. Frame, A History of Western
Philosophy and Theology 773 (2015). Within this view of truth, someone could define what is just and/or right by the law in
any conceivable way; typically in the way that is most beneficial to his or her immediate preference. This view of truth is
entirely contrary to a biblical worldview.
If the lawyer moves forward with the plan, do you have the duty to report his conduct to disciplinary authorities? Do you
do so?
The short answer to this question is “Yes.” The longer answer is “yes” because the lawyer is ethically required to do
so according to the Model Rules. According to Model Rule 8.3, “A lawyer who knows that another lawyer has committed a
violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer’s honesty,
trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, shall inform the appropriate professional authority.” Scott E.
Thompson, The Model Rules of Professional Conduct Through the Lens of the Proverbs 50, Faculty Publications and
Presentations (2011), https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/lusol_fac_pubs/50. If I were a lawyer, I would be bound by the
Model Rules to report this particular lawyer. Crystal Giesel, Professional Responsibility Problems of Practice and the

Profession 50 (7 th ed. 2020). However, even I were not a lawyer, the actual lawyer’s actions would be defined as
“misconduct” according to Model Rule 8.4 and should be reported. Id.
Part 2
(1) Yes, I feel like I have sufficient knowledge of misconduct by Mr. Wilson to warrant reporting. I would report the
information to the appropriate investigating body and/or authorities because, “The Model Rules are an important
framework to protect consumer’s legal services.” Ed Walters, The Model Rules of Autonomous Conduct: Ethical
Responsibilities of Lawyers and Artificial Intelligence, 35 GA. St. U. L. REV. 1091 (2019). I would be availing myself of the
appropriate methods to protect those whom I serve. Due to the sensitive nature of reporting a fellow colleague, I would
attempt to do so in a manner that “gives honest evidence.” Proverbs 12:17 (ESV). It would not be my intention to
embellish or sensationalize what I found, but rather, to make manifest that which is hidden, “for nothing is hidden except
to be made manifest, nor is anything secret except to come to light.” Mark 4:22 (ESV).
(2) Yes, Mr. Wilson’s misconduct is a reportable offense under Rule 8.3. Rule 8.3 states that if another lawyer’s conduct
“raises a substantial question as to that lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, shall
inform the appropriate professional authority.” Scott E. Thompson, The Model Rules of Professional Conduct Through the
Lens of the Proverbs 50, Faculty Publications and Presentations
(2011), https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/lusol_fac_pubs/50. According to Rule 8.4, Mr. Wilson’s conduct involves
“dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.” Mr. Wilson’s actions may not be cogent or lawful regarding Model Rule
1.8.
(3) I would attempt to talk to Mr. Wilson first. I would ask Mr. Wilson about the agreement and inquire why the document
was inaccurately filed. It would not make any difference to me whether Mr. Wilson or other sources agreed that Mr.
Wilson often borrowed money from clients. Additionally, it would not make any difference to me if Mr. Wilson always paid
back his clients. Also, it would make no difference to me if Mr. Wilson told me he would repay Mr. Sylvia immediately.
This is because now that I know of Mr. Wilson’s transactions with this client, I am required to report the issue. Crystal
Giesel, Professional Responsibility Problems of Practice and the Profession 53 (7 th ed. 2020). Also, it would make no
difference to me if Mr. Sylvia was a cousin of Mr. Wilson.
(4) I would make no attempt to talk with Mr. Sylvia. I would leave this investigational activity up to the appropriate
professional authorities to question Mr. Sylvia. Because I would allow the appropriate professional authorities to question
Mr. Sylvia, whatever information obtained from that investigation would not change my opinions about whether I was right
or wrong to report Mr. Wilson. I have a duty and a commitment to God to be just in my actions and I would then have no
remorse.

Andrew T
Part 1
In regards to the scenario presented, the lawyer's plan is completely unethical for couple of reasons, both of which violate
Model Rule 8. Model Rule 8 deals with the "maintaining the integrity of the profession". Nathan M. Crystal and Grace M.
Giesel, Professional Responsibility: Problems of Practice and the Profession 15 (7th edi. 2020). The first reason that his
plan is unethical is that he wants to hire a private investigator to impersonate a university professor to gather information.
The lawyer would violate both Model 8.4(a) and Model 8.4(c) if he carried out such an action. Model 8.4(a) forbids him
"from assisting or inducing someone to act in a way that violates the Model Rules. In addition, that provision also prohibits
[the lawyer] from violating the Model Rules through the acts of another." Id. at 643. In this particular case, it would be
through the private detective. Also, to have the private detective impersonate a university professor would be in violation
of Model 8.4(c) which would be to "engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation" Scott E.
Thompson, The Model Rules of Professional Conduct Through the Lens of The Proverbs (2011). Liberty University Faculty
Publications and Presentations. 50. (accessed October 28th, 2021, at 11:17
AM), https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/lusol_fac_pubs/50.
The second reason why the lawyer's plan is unethical because his plan to get the wife's computer and analyze it
without her knowledge would be in direct violation of the wife's 4th Amendment rights; he is looking for evidence
without a court issued warrant and without her knowledge. That is a criminal act and he would be in violation of Model
Rule 8.4(b), which states that no lawyer can "commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty,
trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects" Id.
Even under the secular standards under the Model Rules, the lawyer's plan is not only unethical but also criminal. But
lawyers who have a biblical worldview have even higher standards. Believing lawyers are obligated to uphold the
truth and to not only to conduct themselves according to the truth but to make sure that others are conducting
themselves to uphold the truth. Id. As the Book of Proverbs says "Even a child is known by his doings, whether his
work be pure, and whether it be right." Proverbs 20:11 (King James Version).

The lawyer hasn't executed his plan to obtain evidence yet so you are not yet obligated to report him under Rule
8.3(a). Rule 8.3(a) states "[a] lawyer who knows that another lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of
Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a
lawyer in all respects, shall inform the appropriated professional authority." Scott E. Thompson, The Model Rules of
Professional Conduct Through the Lens of The Proverbs (2011). Liberty University Faculty Publications and
Presentations. 50. (accessed October 28th, 2021, at 11:17
AM), https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/lusol_fac_pubs/50. As a Christian, however, you must try to convince him to
see the ethical folly of his plan and persuade him not to go through with it. If he does go through with it, however, then
you are obligated to report him to the professional authorities under Rule 8.3(a).

Part 2
1. Do you have sufficient knowledge of misconduct by Mr. Wilson to warrant reporting? I would say yes because even
though they have a written agreement signed by both of them, Mr. Wilson is still violating Rule 1.8(i) by having his
client loaning him the majority of his settlement as a debt, while he still got his attorney's fee.
2. Is Mr. Wilson's misconduct a reportable offense under Rule 8.3? Yes because, as stated above, he still taking the
majority of his settlement as a loan alongside his attorney's fee. While they both agreed to the terms in writing and
authorized the transaction with both of their signatures, it is not a reasonable amount as outlined by Rule 1.8(i).
3. Would you talk with Mr. Wilson before taking action? If so, what would you plan to say to him? Would it make any
difference to your decision if you learned from Mr. Wilson or other sources that he often borrowed money from
clients? Would it make any difference to you that he never failed to repay a client? Would it make a difference to you
if Mr. Wilson told you he would repay Mr. Sylvia immediately? Would it make a difference if Mr. Sylvia was a cousin of
Mr. Wilson? No to all of the above, because the very fact that Mr. Wilson asked for the major of Mr. Sylvia's
settlement as a loan, alongside his attorney's fee. makes it an unreasonable proprietary interest in the settlement
outlined under Rule 1.8.
4. Would you talk with Mr. Sylvia before taking any action? If so, what would you say to him? Would it make any
difference to your decision if Mr. Sylvia told you that he did not want to report Mr. Wilson to the disciplinary
authorities? Yes. You worked on the case and met with him on several cases. As client, you're obligated to let him
know that Mr. Wilson may have taken advantage of him. If he said that he didn't want to report Mr. Wilson, that would
imply knowledge that Mr. Wilson did wrong and so Wilson must be report to the disciplinary authorities.