Legal Ethics LGLA 1219 Movie Analysis  Intolerable Cruelty ,2004  When you are asked about ethical issues, be specific in your answer! Apply the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct.
1. Which (if any) disciplinary rule(s) does Miles violate when he has his first meeting
with Rex Rexroth?
2. Does Miles’ have an assistant/paralegal? If so, describe that character. What is Miles’
associate attorney’s name?
3. Is Miles’ dinner with Marilyn an ethical violation? If so, list the rule(s) that apply.
4. Which (if any) disciplinary rule(s) does Miles violate when he meets with Gus Petch?
5. Is Marilyn guilty of Unlicensed Practice of Law? Explain your answer.

6. Who is Marilyn’s attorney?
7. Why do the characters go to Las Vegas? What happens there?
8. Who is Herb Meyerson? Does Herb breach any ethical rules when he talks to Miles 
about his and Marilyn’s divorce? If yes, which rules?
9. Who hires Wheezy Joe?
10. Does Marvin Untermayer commit a violation of any disciplinary rule when he calls
to tell Miles about Rex Rexroth’s death? If so, which rule(s)?
11. When Freddy Bender describes the circumstances of Wheezy Joe’s death, does he
break any disciplinary rule? If so, which rule(s)? 
12. What happens to Gus Petch at the end of the film?

Alejandro comes into your office for a consultation. He explains to you that he immigrated
to Canada with his mother when he was 6 years old. At age 26, he was charged with an
indictable offence that carries with it a 3-year maximum penalty.

Although Alejandro
received only a 6-month sentence, the minister’s delegate issued him with a removal order
based on his criminal inadmissibility.
Alejandro tells you that this was his first offence and he is deeply sorry for it. He has lived
in Canada almost his entire life and has nothing to return to in his native Chile.
Furthermore, Alejandro’s mother has a progressing disease of muscular dystrophy and is
unable to work.

She relies on Alejandro for financial and emotional support because he is
her only child. Alejandro is desperately seeking to stay in Canada.
1. If you were representing Alejandro in this matter, what would be the first step that
you would take to prevent his removal from Canada? 2 Marks

2. Are there any deadlines that must be complied with? Please refer to the appropriate
IAD Rule to support your answer. 2 Marks

3. In Alejandro’s case, who is responsible for preparing the “record”; what documents
would be included in his record and when is it due? 6 Marks

4. During this legal process, Alejandro informs you (his legal representative) that he
has moved his residence from Toronto to Ottawa. As a result, he would like his case
to be handled by the IRB office in Ottawa. Can you accommodate Alejandro’s
request of changing the location of his proceeding to the IRB in Ottawa? Please
explain. 4 Marks

5. In your opinion, what would be the IRB’s decision? Explain your position. 2 Marks

6. Please describe the removal order appeal process. 20 Marks

Define ‘temporary residents,’ ‘permanent residents,’ ‘citizens‘ and ‘refugees‘?  Are they protected by s. 7 of the Charter?2. How do we define ‘migrants‘?  3. What did the Supreme Court hold in the Baker case? Why is this judgment important?4. List the Ministries involved in immigration law, and the functions of each.5. Under what circumstances can a CBSA officer exercise powers of search and seizure? Of arrest without a warrant?

Susan Creaser is a single mom who has just learned that her wages have been garnished for failure to
repay a debt she owes – she bought a new 65″ 4K TV on credit so that she could see every bead of sweat drip down the contestant’s faces on Dancing with the Stars.

She had been making regular payments on the debt but fell behind when the youngest of her three children became ill, requiring her to pay for some unexpected medical expenses.

The medical crisis is now over and Creaser can get back on track toward continued repayment of the debt. She has even managed to save a little bit of money to pay toward the debt at the end of the month, but now that her wages have been garnished
she is unable to support her three children. She is very scared.
The senior partner at the law firm where you work shows you a notice of the decision made by a court
clerk to garnish Creaser’s wages.

In an interview with Creaser, the partner had asked if this was the
first she had heard about the garnishment, and Creaser said no – she had received a letter telling her
the reasons why they might garnish her wages along with a copy of the plaintiff’s complaint. The letter
explained that her wages would be garnished in 7 days, but that she was welcome to submit a written
response, no greater than five pages, to respond to the reasons given for the garnishment.

Creaser did
write something up and submitted it, but it was obviously unpersuasive because she got the notice of
garnishment shortly after that.

She was never given an opportunity to call witnesses or make her case
in person. She is very grateful that the firm has agreed to represent her in the debt collection lawsuit
the creditor filed. The senior partner asks if it is worth the firm’s time to challenge the state’s
garnishment procedure as a violation of the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause.

HYPOTHETICAL STATE STATUTE
1. Debt collection suit is filed and plaintiff receives
garnishment order from court clerk
2. Notice. Plaintiff must provide defendant a statement
of reasons, as well as serve a copy of the complaint at
least 7 days prior to any garnishment of wages.
3. Allow defendant to submit a maximum five-page
written response showing that there is strong likelihood
the plaintiff is not entitled to garnishment.
5. Notice of the decision provided to defendant and wages
garnished.

6. Defend the debt collection suit

Dirk owns and runs a small local store. Last week, Cong, a customer in the shop, through no fault of his own, tripped on a loose floor tile and fell onto some shelves. Due to his fall, Cong sprained his ankle; he also damaged his mobile phone that he was carrying at the time. The floor tiles had been laid the previous day by a local contractor with a questionable reputation, Fancy Flooring Limited.

During the evenings, Dirk puts a sign on the door of his shop that states ‘No school children between the hours of 18:00 and 20:00’. On Friday evening, Dirk reinstalled the shelves and mopped the floor. Salee, a 15-year-old schoolgirl, ignored the sign and came into the shop at 19:00 to buy some sweets. Salee slipped on the wet floor and broke her arm when she fell onto the shelves; she also smashed her wristwatch.

Advise Cong and Salee as to their potential claims under the Occupiers’ Liability Acts.