[textbook]Traversing the Ethical Minefield Problems, Law, and Professional Responsibility by Susan R. Martyn (z-lib.org)(1) (1)

from the practice of law or disbarment. . . . Though we do not condone Potts’s conduct in
this matter, we recognize that the other parties could have resolved the question of the basis
and scope of the settlement by specifically assigning a dollar amount to the estate value in
the memorandum. . . .
In light of these mitigating factors, especially Potts’s history of compliance with the
rules of professional conduct and his character and good reputation to this point, we
conclude that a public censure will apprise Potts sufficiently of the gravity of his
misconduct under the given circumstances. Moreover, a public censure will alert the public
that the Court will not tolerate such misconduct from a lawyer. . . .
Problem
13-2. Client admits she doesn’t pay Social Security for her daughter’s “wonderful”
nanny, because Nanny is an undocumented immigrant who might then get in trouble.
“I’m trying to protect her job,” Client unabashedly announces. Martyn & Fox informs
Client, “If you don’t report her income and pay the tax, the firm can’t prepare and sign
your income tax return.” “That’s okay,” says Client. “You just prepare it; I’ll sign it. Then
the risk’s on me.” Are we safe?
B. Wrongful Discharge
1. Inside Counsel Model Rules 1.2(d), 1.6, 1.13, 1.16 RLGL § 32
Wadler v. Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.
212 F. Supp. 3d 829 (N.D. Ca. 2016)
Joseph C. SPERO, Chief Magistrate Judge.
Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. manufactures and sells products and equipment around the
world. Because Bio-Rad sells many of its products to hospitals, universities, and similar
public entities and officials, it must abide by the terms of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
(“FCPA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 78dd–2, 78ff, which forbids the company or its agents from
engaging in bribery and kickback schemes involving public officials and requires that
companies maintain accurate accounting records and put in place adequate internal
controls or face significant fines and possible criminal punishment.
Plaintiff Sanford Wadler became Bio-Rad’s general counsel in 1989 and served in that
capacity for nearly 25 years. He was terminated by Bio-Rad in June 2013. Wadler asserts he
was terminated because he was investigating potential FCPA violations in China and
because he reported his concerns to Bio-Rad’s Audit Committee “when it became clear that
the company was not taking reasonable steps to investigate and remedy FCPA violations.”
Bio-Rad contends it terminated Wadler “due to poor work performance and behavior.”
Wadler’s allegations were addressed in administrative proceedings conducted by the
411