A bank of 205 exam style questions for law students preparing for the MPRE. Every answer comes with a four part rationale: why the correct answer is right, why the others are wrong, the principle behind it, and the takeaway to remember.
Sample question 1. CONFIDENTIALITY: Under Model Rule 1.6, a lawyer may reveal client confidential information without consent when:
A. Any time the lawyer believes disclosure is fair
B. The information would embarrass the client
C. To prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm
D. Whenever opposing counsel requests it
Answer: C. Correct: Rule 1.6(b) permits disclosure to prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm. Why the others are wrong: mere embarrassment is not an exception; the lawyer's personal sense of fairness is not a listed exception; an opponent's request never overrides confidentiality. Principle: confidentiality is broad, and the exceptions are narrow and specifically enumerated. Takeaway: memorize the 1.6(b) exceptions; life and safety is the clearest one.
Sample question 2. CONFLICTS: A concurrent conflict of interest under Rule 1.7 exists when:
A. The fee is contingent
B. The lawyer dislikes the client
C. The clients are in different states
D. Representation of one client is directly adverse to another, or materially limited
Answer: D. Correct: Rule 1.7 defines a concurrent conflict as direct adversity between clients or a material limitation on the representation. Why the others are wrong: personal dislike is not a conflict; geography is irrelevant; a contingent fee is a fee arrangement, not a conflict. Principle: conflicts turn on adversity or material limitation, not on feelings or logistics. Takeaway: spot direct adversity and material limitation, then ask whether informed written consent can cure it.
Sample question 3. COMPETENCE: Rule 1.1 requires a lawyer to provide competent representation, which includes:
A. The legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and preparation reasonably necessary
B. Never associating other counsel
C. Winning every case
D. Working without any fee
Answer: A. Correct: Rule 1.1 defines competence as the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation. Why the others are wrong: competence does not guarantee winning; it does not require free work; a competent lawyer may associate other counsel. Principle: competence is about adequate preparation and skill, not outcomes. Takeaway: a lawyer lacking a skill can become competent through study or by associating a competent lawyer.
What you get on iKuiz
205 questions for this exam, in Live Test, Study Mode, Flashcards, and MyTutor, a personal AI style tutor that teaches one concept at a time.
A readiness score that tells you honestly whether you are prepared, plus your weak areas by topic.
Every question read aloud if you want it, and a new free Question of the Day every day.
One membership covers all 200+ exams on the platform, from nursing to trades to test prep.