Washington Lawyer - November/December 2020 - 5

YOUR VOICE

COMMUNITY * CAREER * PROFESSION * PRACTICE MANAGEMENT * SERVICE

THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BAR MAGAZINE

SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2020

Legal Education

BAR EXAM
UPHEAVAL

Patrice Gilbert Photography

REIMAGINED

DELAYING FUTURE HARMS
I appreciate the insights provided by
Stephen Lott, Chit Yuen Yi, and Aaron Dumas
(September/October 2020 issue) into the
psychological factors that help explain why
clients sometimes ignore counsel's advice. But
I would add another factor - the potential
career impact on client decision makers.
Companies are not monolithic. Managers and
executives who must decide whether to follow
advice of counsel have their own career
agendas.
When looking at the sunk cost fallacy, the
"significant investment" that causes people
to "have trouble pulling away from a particular
cause of action" may not just be economic;
it may include the decision maker's credibility
and status (and potential career path). And
managers who discount future harms because
they are delayed and uncertain may be motivated by the short-term targets necessary to
keep their jobs: "I need to make my numbers
this quarter; if we have a problem in a few
years, my successor will have to deal with it."
Fred Geldon
Rockville, Maryland

ON BAR EXAM UNCERTAINTY
I read your bar exam article with great interest
and congratulate you on an excellent write-up
("Re-envisioning the Bar Exam," September/
October 2020 issue) on a topic that changed
on a weekly basis over several months locally
and nationwide. As your article is now in print,
it is ironic that uncertainty lingers about
diploma privilege in D.C. and elsewhere and
the soundness of software platforms for the
remote exam. The good news for 2020 exam
takers is that there is reciprocity now between
D.C. and so many states for that special online
exam, even though it is not designated as a
UBE exam that confers a portable score from
the National Conference of Bar Examiners. The
next challenges are the February and July 2021
exams with continuing efforts to manage the
pandemic for the safety and well-being of all.
Renée DeVigne
Washington, D.C.

SPOTTING ETHICAL RED FLAGS
Hope Todd's ethics article, "Shady Propositions:
D.C. Rule 1.2(e)" (September/October 2020
issue), reminded me of my experience. A man,
let's say "Bill," called. He had heard I was an
expert in a certain regulatory matter and
wanted me to represent him. After patiently
hearing him out on his proposed business
plan, I said: "It's illegal. I can't and won't represent you." Several years later, a friend of Bill's
called. Bill had gone ahead with his plan and
was now in prison for it. Bill wanted me to get
him paroled. I explained I was not a criminal
lawyer. The friend said Bill knew this, but he
really wanted me to help because I was "the
only honest lawyer he had talked to."
James H. Johnston
Bethesda, Maryland

Washington Lawyer welcomes your letters.
Submissions should be directed to
Washington Lawyer, District of Columbia
Bar, 901 4th Street NW, Washington, DC
20001. Submissions are also accepted by
email at editorial@dcbar.org. Letters may
be edited for clarity and space.

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2020

WASHINGTON LAWYER

Washington Lawyer - November/December 2020

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Washington Lawyer - November/December 2020