A client's right to fire their counsel at any time is the cornerstone of attorney-client autonomy.

Outline

• Hook: A quick door-check moment—why clients should feel in control of who represents them.

• Core idea: The client’s right to discharge counsel at any time is the heart of autonomy in the attorney–client relationship.

• Why the correct answer is B, in plain terms.

• Why the other options aren’t accurate, with gentle, real-world explanations.

• What termination looks like in practice: ethics, fees, file handling, and confidentiality.

• Practical takeaways: questions to ask, signals that it’s time to switch, how to do it smoothly.

• A light digression on related ethics topics that matter for MPRE study, tied back to client autonomy.

• Conclusion: autonomy, trust, and choosing the right representation.

The simple truth that changes everything

Let me ask you something straightforward: when you hire a lawyer, who should be in the driver’s seat about your case? If you’re like most people, you want control, clarity, and the ability to switch course if the ride isn’t working. In the world of law, that impulse is recognized in the most fundamental way—the client’s right to discharge their counsel at any time. That’s not just polite sentiment; it’s a cornerstone of how the attorney–client relationship is designed to work.

Think about it like this: you’re the one closest to your goals, your timeline, and your bottom line. You need representation that respects that. The MPRE puts a spotlight on this autonomy because it touches on trust, choice, and accountability. It’s about ensuring clients stay in the loop and can seek a better fit if their needs change. So, what does this right look like in concrete terms?

Why option B is the right answer

Correct answer: B – To fire their counsel at any time.

Here’s the thing: the right to end the attorney–client relationship is a direct expression of client autonomy. You hire a lawyer to advocate your interests, explain options, and fight for your outcomes. If you’re dissatisfied, or if your needs shift—say you want a different strategy, or you’re not getting timely updates—the authority to terminate that relationship rests with you. It’s your case, your objectives, and your comfort level that count.

This right protects you from being locked into representation that no longer aligns with your goals. It also creates an incentive for lawyers to communicate clearly, manage expectations, and deliver value. Autonomy isn’t about being capricious; it’s about having the ultimate say in who handles your legal matters.

Why the other options don’t fit the same core idea

• A. To receive legal advice at all times

• Ethically, lawyers have duties that may limit the kind or timing of advice in certain situations. For example, there are conflicts, confidentiality concerns, or professional obligations that shape what can be said or done at any given moment. Autonomy isn’t about guaranteeing every possible piece of advice around the clock; it’s about the right to switch lawyers if the arrangement isn’t meeting your needs.

• C. To limit the lawyer’s representation by contract

• Contracts can define scope and terms, yes, but a unilateral limit on representation isn’t an absolute right for a client. A lawyer must agree to terms, and there’s a back-and-forth in negotiations. The key point is that, while you can set expectations and limits, it’s not an absolute, unconditional right to impose limits without the lawyer’s consent. That’s why this option doesn’t capture the same fundamental autonomy.

• D. To require their lawyer to accept all terms

• Lawyers aren’t obliged to swallow any offer. Ethical rules allow lawyers to decline terms that clash with professional duties or ethical standards. The professional relationship is a two-way street, and the right to terminate isn’t a free pass for pressuring a lawyer into accepting anything. It’s about choice, not coercion.

In short, B captures the essence: the client has the authority to end the relationship at any time. This principle keeps the power in the client’s hands and aligns with the broader idea that the attorney acts as a fiduciary for the client’s interests.

What termination looks like in real life

You might be wondering, “If I decide to switch, what actually happens?” Here’s a practical map, grounded in everyday professional life:

• The decision to terminate

• You don’t owe an explanation beyond what you’re comfortable sharing. The reasons can be as simple as a desire for a different approach or a mismatch in communication style. The key is that you initiate the change in the manner that feels right to you.

• Fees and billing

• When you part ways, you’ll want a clean accounting. You’ll expect a final bill that reflects the work done and any outstanding charges. If you’re unhappy about a fee, you can review the itemization and ask for clarification. The important part: termination doesn’t erase the obligation to pay for work already performed.

• Handling client files

• Your old lawyer should provide your files and documents to the new counsel or to you, depending on what you arrange. There are confidentiality rules that govern what can be shared and how, but in general you should be able to obtain your materials to avoid losing ground in your case.

• Confidentiality and conflicts

• Even after termination, the duty of confidentiality stays with the lawyer. They can’t reveal sensitive information from your case. If a conflict arises with the new representation, it’s up to you to navigate it, but your prior attorney can’t disclose confidential details without your permission.

• Transition essentials

• Smooth transitions matter. A brief of the current status, a summary of key issues, and a plan from the new lawyer can help you pick up momentum quickly. It’s like switching physicians mid-treatment: you want continuity of care without skipping important steps.

A few practical takeaways for students and readers

• Know what you want upfront

• Before you hire anyone, outline your goals, communication expectations, and preferred pace. Clarity helps you decide sooner if a fit isn’t working—and that quick pivot is exactly what autonomy is for.

• Ask the right questions

• How do you handle updates? What’s your fee structure? How do you manage conflicts of interest? What’s your plan if we disagree about strategy? The answers give you a sense of compatibility.

• Watch for red flags

• If you feel ignored, if updates are sparse, or if you sense a mismatch between your goals and the lawyer’s approach, it might be time to reassess. Don’t wait until a problem becomes a crisis to consider a change.

• Plan the switch thoughtfully

• If you decide to move on, request your files, understand any outstanding fee obligations, and coordinate with the new counsel. A thoughtful handoff minimizes disruption and keeps your case moving forward.

A quick aside on related ethics topics that matter here

Client autonomy sits amid a web of ethical duties that MPRE-style questions love to test. A few connected threads:

• Confidentiality stays intact

• The information you share with your lawyer remains protected, even after you end the relationship. That confidentiality is a bedrock of trust.

• Conflicts of interest matter

• If a new lawyer might have a conflicting interest with you, that’s a red flag. You always want representation that can focus fully on your interests without competing incentives.

• Competence and diligence

• A lawyer must be prepared and capable of handling your matter. If you feel your current counsel isn’t meeting that standard, autonomy gives you a path to seek someone who can.

• Communication as a two-way street

• You deserve timely updates and clear explanations. When that breaks down, it’s natural to reassess who’s best suited to carry your message forward.

Bringing it all together

Here’s the bigger picture: the client’s right to discharge their counsel at any time is a practical, ethical safeguard that keeps the attorney–client relationship honest and effective. It honors your agency, your expectations, and your responsibility to steer your own affairs. The other options, while touching on real components of professional life, don’t match the core autonomy at the heart of that right.

If you’re studying MPRE concepts, this idea isn’t a throwaway fact. It’s a lens—one that helps you see how ethical rules play out in real relationships. It’s not about clever exam tricks; it’s about understanding how law, ethics, and human dynamics intersect in everyday decisions.

A closing thought

Switching lawyers is never pleasant, but it’s sometimes necessary. You’re not handing over power; you’re choosing a partner who can help you reach your goals with clarity and confidence. When you keep that mindset, the process becomes less about fear of making a change and more about steering toward a better fit. And in the end, isn’t that what justice and advocacy are really about—serving the client’s best interests with integrity, competence, and respect?

If you’d like, I can summarize this in a quick checklist you can skim before any potential switch, or tailor a few questions you might ask a prospective counsel to ensure alignment.