10.08.2013 Views

Sorted by Commenter - Ethics - State of California

Sorted by Commenter - Ethics - State of California

Sorted by Commenter - Ethics - State of California

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

BARRY TARLow.<br />

BLAIR BERK<br />

MARK O. HEANEY<br />

MI KIM<br />

DAVID HARRIS<br />

CBRTIFIED SPBCIALIST - CRDUNAL LAw<br />

STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA<br />

BOARD OF LEOAL<br />

TARLOW &<br />

Rex Heinke<br />

Vice President - <strong>State</strong> Bar <strong>of</strong> <strong>California</strong><br />

Akiin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP\<br />

2029 Century Park East, Suite 2400<br />

Los Angeles, CA 90067<br />

Dear Rex:<br />

9119 SUNSET BOULEVARD<br />

Los ANGELES, CALIFORNIA<br />

April 29, 2010<br />

(310) 278-2111<br />

FAX (310) 550-7055<br />

Re: Opposition to Proposed New Rule <strong>of</strong> Pr<strong>of</strong>essional Conduct 1.5(e) (4-200)<br />

(Fees for Legal Services) Abolishing Nonrefundable Retainers<br />

I am a lawyer who has represented individuals and businesses accused <strong>of</strong> crimes in<br />

state and federal courts throughout the country for over forty years.<br />

is my biography so that you can consider my background and experience in evaluating my<br />

qualifications to present the analysis set out in this Submission. I am seriously concerned as<br />

are many other <strong>California</strong> lawyers about the problems raised <strong>by</strong> the Commission for the<br />

Revision <strong>of</strong> the Rules <strong>of</strong> Pr<strong>of</strong>essional Conduct' s ("Commission ) proposed new Rule 1. 5( e)<br />

and conforming amendments to Rule 4200<br />

Bar <strong>of</strong> <strong>California</strong> ("Proposal "). Paragraph (e) essentially prohibiting nonrefundable retainers<br />

for legal services will drastically and detrimentally impact the economics <strong>of</strong> practicing law<br />

in <strong>California</strong>, as well as the ability <strong>of</strong><br />

services. I am requesting a meaningful opportunity to be heard, on behalf <strong>of</strong> the members<br />

<strong>of</strong> the bar who overwhelmingly oppose these radical and unnecessary revisions <strong>of</strong> custom<br />

practice, and the law, (1) if this matter is heard <strong>by</strong> RAC and (2) at the time it is heard <strong>by</strong> the<br />

Board <strong>of</strong> Governors.<br />

135

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!