Sorted by Commenter - Ethics - State of California

More documents

Recommendations

Info

(3) (4) (5) (6) some form of exceptions to Paragraph (e)'s ban on nonrefundable retainers in (e)(1)-(2)). There is no identifiable resulting from the current rules that retainer or that would be remedied by this sweeping change. The Proposal ignores the fact that in continued use of the nonrefundable retainer "earned when paid" as an fee arrangement. The Board of fixed fees flat fees " and "nonrefundable retainers" to be earned when paid, with title immediately transferring to the explicitly spelled out the arrangement with the inclusion of an that such fees paid in advance of legal services are "earned when paid. Paragraph (e)(1) (a true nonrefundable retainer as a minimum fee to will also be credited for future amount of the retainer. Rule ability to contract in a way that is would refuse) and prevents the lawyer from earned when received if he does any legal work while waiting for a case to be filed or rejected. Paragraph (e)(2) nonrefundable flat fee" to cover fees for the entire length of the case, including trial. Since flat fee should cover administrative evidentiary hearing) that often cannot be reasonably predicted prior to being retained, the contingencies is refundable, at least until the time that the contingencies occur, See Request That the Supreme Court of California Approve Amendments. . Rules of Professional Conduct " October 1992, page 9. Although the proposed fixed fee,' flat fee' or ' nonrefundable fee,' such types of retainer fee permissible under the , such fees would required to be placed in the member s client trust unless the member written attorney-client fee , paid in advance of the provision oflegal services, are earned when paid. 140
(7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) Paragraph (e )(2) requires the nature of the fee by representing that the fee "is the lawyer s property on receipt." However, the critical issue is not what the fee is called but who owns or has any interest in the funds. Rather than protecting the client's entitlement to a refund of the " nonrefundable flat fee (see proposed Rule 1.5(e)(2)(v)), the client from receiving a refund if these funds are the subject of any state seizure, jeopardy assessment, restraining order or forfeiture, or even attachment by potential creditors. The lawyer cannot return all or part of the the client because the seizing agency will be entitled to any fee refund. Paragraph ( s claims, exposes performing all types of legal services to extrinsic litigation or significant financial risk by facilitating the restraint and/or seizure of fees if any client has a potential criminal or bankruptcy problem or has a dispute with the IRS, the Franchise Tax Board, the S. , or is the potential target of a restraining order, or is vulnerable to potential creditors' claims. Because Paragraph 1.5(e)(2) will restraint/forfeiture or civil seizure, compliance with Paragraph (e) deprives those accused of crimes of their and many civil clients of their ability to obtain any legal representation. Paragraph (e )(2) permits a client to , before all of the substantial amount of work, and will lawsuits, or Bar complaints. The Proposal is confusing and internally client bar complaints, arbitration claims, and civil actions involving fee for honorable lawyers acting in good faith. Paragraph , detailed wording included in flat unfamiliar with these new Rules and the complex fact patterns that will It is also sanctified" State Bar fee forms (specifically the fixed fee" clause) that have been past 20 years and represent the "gold standard" for California lawyers. 3 In her article in the California Bar Journal legal ethics expert Diana Karpman urges California lawyers to use these State Bar fee forms: 141
Page 1 and 2:
No. Commenter Position 1 Comment on
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
No. Commenter Position 1 10 Crimina
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
RRC - Rule 1.5 [4-200] E-mails, etc
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
ARBITRATION ADVISORY 01-02 RRC - Ru
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
http://community.lawyers.com/forums
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
May 25, 2010 Martinez E-mail to Son
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53:
Rule 1.5 - Public Comment - File Li
Page 67 and 68: 101
Page 69 and 70: 103
Page 71 and 72: 105
Page 73 and 74: 107
Page 75 and 76: 109
Page 77 and 78: 111
Page 79 and 80: 113
Page 81 and 82: 115
Page 83 and 84: 117
Page 85 and 86: STROOCK April 2, 2010 Michael F. Pe
Page 87 and 88: MORTIMER L. LASKI' KENNETH G. GORDO
Page 89 and 90: Mr. Howard Miller April 8 , 2010 Pa
Page 91 and 92: 125
Page 93 and 94: 127
Page 95 and 96: 129
Page 97 and 98: 131
Page 99 and 100: unaware 2 of this new rule or that
Page 101 and 102: BARRY TARLow. BLAIR BERK MARK O. HE
Page 103 and 104: 4, The Proposal a. Comment b. 5. Th
Page 105: arrangement, has always been subjec
Page 109 and 110: edefines a widely accepted , and in
Page 111 and 112: alone seek to prohibit , no version
Page 113 and 114: meeting reflects that there was no
Page 115 and 116: II. ANAL YSIS OF THE SUBSTANTIVE PR
Page 117 and 118: Responsibility and Conduct 10 They
Page 119 and 120: . . " " I suggest we . . . have a c
Page 121 and 122: agreed hourly or by an whether the
Page 123 and 124: " " On , Paragraph flat fees" as th
Page 125 and 126: arrangement with the inclusion of a
Page 127 and 128: agreement, that result in the refun
Page 129 and 130: the Commission s proposed paragraph
Page 131 and 132: true if the fee anything but an abs
Page 133 and 134: Restraining orders, fee forfeitures
Page 135 and 136: fee is "the lawyer s property on re
Page 137 and 138: Under the revised Proposal, the fee
Page 139 and 140: Similarly, the accepts one case tha
Page 141 and 142: minimum fee that is a payments or a
Page 143 and 144: Champion (May 2004); Tarlow Fee For
Page 145 and 146: July 10, 2007 Memo from the Board o
Page 147 and 148: the work has been completed and aft
Page 149 and 150: '-- 183
Page 151 and 152: BIOGRAPHY Page scholar " the "ultim
Page 153 and 154: 187
Page 157 and 158:
Date: April 22, 2008 MEMORANDUM To:
Page 159 and 160:
193
Page 161 and 162:
195
Page 163 and 164:
197
Page 165 and 166:
199
Page 167 and 168:
201
Page 169 and 170:
the country. The issue is of substa
Page 171 and 172:
□ ABA Model Rule substantially ad
Page 173 and 174:
COMMISSION FOR THE REVISION OF THE
Page 175 and 176:
Nothing in the intervening 75 years
Page 177 and 178:
Should it be Deposited?, 1 Fla. Coa
Page 179 and 180:
ABA Model Rule Rule 1.5 Fees (1) th
Page 181 and 182:
ABA Model Rule Rule 1.5 Fees (b) Th
Page 183 and 184:
ABA Model Rule Rule 1.5 Fees (e) A
Page 185 and 186:
ABA Model Rule Rule 1.5 Fees Commis
Page 187 and 188:
ABA Model Rule Rule 1.5 Fees Commen
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Terms of Payment ABA Model Rule Rul
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
(a) A lawyer shall not make an agre
Page 199 and 200:
Non-refundable Fee [1B] Paragraph (
Page 201 and 202:
[9] Paragraph (e)(2) describes a fe
Page 203 and 204:
(2) a contingent fee for representi
Page 205 and 206:
[5] An agreement may not be made wh
Page 207 and 208:
(1) a lawyer may charge a true reta
Page 209 and 210:
[5] An agreement may not be made wh
Page 211 and 212:
This concept comes out of early cas
Page 213 and 214:
criminal cases but not in matrimoni
Page 215 and 216:
In civil matters, New York lawyers
Page 217 and 218:
“obtained in advance of the rende
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
No. Commenter Position 1 6 Californ
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
No. Commenter Position 1 29 Nationa
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
No. Commenter Position 1 37 Santa C
Page 247 and 248:
No. Commenter Position 1 39 State B
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
ARBITRATION ADVISORY 01-02 RRC - Ru
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
http://community.lawyers.com/forums
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
May 25, 2010 Martinez E-mail to Son
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293:
show all

Sorted by Commenter - Ethics - State of California

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?