The New Jersey Supreme Court has agreed to take up a dispute over a ruling requiring lawyers in some fee-shifting cases to inform the client about other counsel who can provide representation on more favorable terms.

On March 8, the Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal of a ruling voiding a lawyer’s retainer agreement in a fee-shifting case. The appeals courts said the retainer was void because attorney Brian Cige, a Somerville solo, failed to explain to the client that he would be charging hourly fees. The justices said they would consider the appeals court’s invalidation of the retainer and its imposition of a new rule on lawyers who charge hourly fees for working on discrimination or other fee-shifting cases.

This content has been archived.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 Advance® 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]