Problem
A year has passed since Rajni began working at Price and Associates as a paralegal. She has taken on many files and is preparing for her first trial.
Earlier in the week, while waiting for her lunch order at a popular café near the office, Rajni ran into her colleague,
Sebastian, who had also come in to grab a sandwich. He suggested that they sit down and eat together. She had intended to take the food back to her office and continue working, but nevertheless agreed.
Over lunch, Sebastian began describing a file he recently took on involving two local business partners who were suing a competitor for the tort of passing off. He mentioned them by name and said he'd heard one of them had had an affair with a local politician. The café was very busy that day. Rajni scanned the restaurant quickly, concerned that someone may have overheard the comment. She hoped his remarks were drowned out by the buzz of conversation in the air. Rajni shot Sebastian a stern look, widening her eyes at him. She immediately changed the subject.
Later that day, Rajni popped her head into Sebastian's office and asked, "Since you're acting for both partners on that matter you mentioned at lunch, how did you approach the conflict of interest issue? I'm just curious because I haven't yet had a file where it's come up."
"I'm not worried about that," Sebastian said dismissively. "They're not in a dispute with each other. They're in a dispute with the moron they're suing. The partners' interests are aligned."
"Right, but they may not continue to be aligned and, anyway, the Rules require that you ..."
"Rajni," Sebastian interrupted impatiently, "can't you see I'm busy right now? I really don't have time for this." Rajni awkwardly turned away and headed back to her office. "Fine," she thought to herself, "it's not my problem," and she settled back into her work. Nevertheless, it weighed heavily on her mind throughout the day. She certainly wasn't fond of Sebastian, but she cared about the reputation of the firm.
Meanwhile, Rajni began to feel intensely pressured about her upcoming trial. She had been losing sleep for weeks now, was not eating properly, and some of her other files had been put on hold in favour of trial preparation. She was doubting her ability to cross-examine, and she was continuously revising her closing statement.
On the morning of trial, Rajni found a bright-eyed Renata Plush, her client, waiting for her on the steps of the courthouse, confident in her pending success. Ms Plush, an interior designer, was being sued by a local restaurateur, Ernesto Fusuli, who was alleging breach of contract. Mr Fusuli's first language was not English, and he was self-representing.
Several months ago, he had hired Ms Plush to redesign his downtown Italian restaurant and claimed that she had overcharged him on several aspects of the project, having procured items of significantly inferior quality to those that were contemplated under the agreement. Ms Plush, however, categorically denied the allegations and insisted that she delivered exactly according to the terms of the agreement. Unfortunately, the contract was silent on the specific items that were in question, and instead provided a general description of the work to be completed and the contract price.
Over coffee before court commenced, Ms Plush leaned forward and lowered her voice, saying, "I probably should have mentioned this sooner-I may have made some 'substitutions' along the way." She used air quotes when saying "substitutions" and gave Rajni a wink. Rajni felt a flash of panic streak through her body. She had no idea the extent to which Ms Plush had misled her. Their matter was second on the docket.
What should Rajni do in light of the information Ms Plush has shared with her right before trial? Cite the applicable Rules and Guidelines.