Certified Legal Professional (CLP) Practice Exam

What was a potential disciplinary issue for the attorney who previously worked for the EPA?

1. The attorney had previous involvement with the same companies

2. The attorney acted in good faith without disclosing confidential information

3. The attorney believed they could separate their past and present work

4. The attorney had not handled any direct disputes at the EPA

The correct answer is: The attorney believed they could separate their past and present work

The correct answer reflects a significant concern regarding the separation of prior and current professional roles, particularly in legal practices involving governmental agencies like the EPA. The ethical implications of transitioning from a regulatory role to one directly involved with companies that were previously subject to that regulation necessitate a careful evaluation of potential conflicts of interest. When an attorney believes they can effectively separate past work from current roles, it raises questions about their ability to remain objective and unbiased, especially if they have insider knowledge or established relationships from their time at the EPA. This perceived inability to fully detach from prior influences can create the potential for ethical violations, particularly around issues of loyalty, confidentiality, and impartiality. The other options focus on aspects that might be less problematic in terms of disciplinary concerns. Previous involvement with the same companies does not automatically lead to a conflict unless it affects the attorney’s current judgment. Acting in good faith without disclosing confidential information, while important, wouldn't constitute a disciplinary issue on its own if no secret information was misused. Lastly, not handling direct disputes at the EPA does not inherently relate to a disciplinary issue, as merely holding such a position does not impose culpability if there were no direct conflicts during their tenure.