Is the analysis the same or is there something about
client perjury that suggests another course?
Not exact matches
It could make me acknowledge and agree to comply with a duty to withdraw when a
client has committed
perjury.
If your
client has really made a patent application in his name, that is at best worthless and at worst a criminal offence akin to
perjury.
If a
client informs Campbell that he will commit
perjury should he be called to testify, she will not call him to the stand.
If he opens his mouth he goes to RECO and has to get his
client, who is happy to get out of it all, to commit
perjury.