When legal fees outpace the recovery to the client, it can give rise to serious implications from New Jersey’s Rules of Professional Conduct (RPCs). New Jersey’s Disciplinary Review Board (DRB) has found multiple RPC violations in such situations, including RPCs 1.4 (Communication); 1.5 (Fees); and 8.4 (Misconduct). These situations almost always stem from insufficient communication, including lack of: oral or written fee agreement; discussion regarding expected recovery; regular invoicing; and explanation of how settlement proceeds will be allocated. These situations clearly cross into ethical violations when attorneys, on notice of a dispute over funds, nonetheless withdraw the funds to satisfy their legal fees. Violations can result in a range of consequences, from admonition to disbarment; as well as disgorgement of all fees, imposition of disciplinary hearing costs, and supplemental continuing education requirements. As illustrated by the following DRB decisions, sufficient communication is key to avoiding these disputes.

In In Re Barbour, DRB 96-073, an attorney received a one-year suspension after he attempted to retain the entire settlement amount to satisfy his legal fees. In Barbour, an attorney charged a retainer fee of $1,500; however, no written fee agreement was ever drafted, and there were no discussions of his hourly rate or scope of representation. However, there was an understanding that the adversary would be responsible for the legal fees pursuant to a local ordinance. The client ultimately accepted a settlement offer of $17,500. At the time of the settlement, the outstanding legal fees were in excess of the settlement amount. The attorney claimed the client understood the settlement proceeds would be used exclusively to satisfy his legal fees. The client claimed the settlement was always understood to be $17,500 plus attorney fees. After receiving the settlement check, the attorney began withdrawing settlement funds toward his legal fees without the client’s knowledge or consent.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]