Which is NOT a reason for permissive withdrawal from representation?

Permissive withdrawal from representation allows a lawyer to discontinue their services under specific circumstances, but certain reasons must align with the professional conduct rules. In this context, the correct answer indicates that the reason cited—lawyer has accepted another case—does not qualify as a justifiable ground for withdrawal under the rules governing attorney conduct.

When a lawyer has taken on another case, it does not typically reflect a conflict or an ethical breach related to the current representation. Rather, attorneys have the obligation to manage their caseloads effectively, making sure to adequately represent all clients. The presence of a new case usually doesn't impede the lawyer's ability to fulfill their responsibilities to existing clients unless it leads to an actual conflict of interest or detracts from the attention required for the ongoing representation.

On the other hand, the other options represent valid reasons for permissive withdrawal. A client’s refusal to communicate can hinder effective representation, making it difficult for the lawyer to provide adequate counsel. Prior fraudulent conduct by a client is significant because an attorney cannot associate with or support such behavior. Lastly, if a client persists in criminal conduct, a lawyer may find it ethically necessary to withdraw, as continuing the representation could implicate them in the illegal activities. Each of these scenarios relates directly