In the scenario where Attorney Chapman assigns a paralegal tasks without review, what ethical rule has been violated?

When Attorney Chapman assigns tasks to a paralegal without providing adequate supervision, it results in a violation of the ethical rule that mandates attorneys to supervise nonlawyer assistants properly. Attorneys hold the responsibility to ensure that their staff, including paralegals, are performing tasks within the bounds of ethical guidelines and professional standards. This includes overseeing the quality of the work and ensuring that the nonlawyer’s actions do not compromise client interests or violate any laws.

In legal practice, adequate supervision is crucial to maintaining the integrity of the legal services provided to clients. By neglecting this duty, an attorney could inadvertently allow a paralegal to engage in unauthorized or improper practices that could harm clients, jeopardize cases, or even lead to breaches of client confidentiality.

The other options do not directly apply to the situation involving supervision. Client confidentiality concerns relate to the handling and protection of sensitive client information. Equal opportunity pertains to discrimination issues in the workplace, while conflict of interest involves situations where an attorney's ability to represent a client may be compromised by competing interests. Therefore, the lack of supervision specifically aligns with the requirement for attorneys to oversee their nonlawyer assistants effectively.