Sorted by Commenter - Ethics - State of California

Responsibility and Conduct
10 They were soundly rejected based
e"COPRAC") in 1997.
on the overwhelming number of
California lawyers.
In fact, in 1992, the Board of
earned when paid"
Governors endorsed the continued use of "fixed fees flat fees " and "nonrefundable
retainers" to be earned when paid, with title immediately transferring to the attorney so
long as the
inclusion of an express statement that such fees paid in
earned when paid. See October 1992 State Bar Memorandum (prepared by the Office
of Professional Competence, Planning and Development). Indeed, it was COPRAC that
first suggested (see May 20, 1991 COPRAC memorandum) that any change to the rules
should explicitly add "nonrefundable retainers" as part of the definition of "true" retainers
earned upon receipt. concerned" that any
proposed rule change not "unduly ability to
nonrefundable retainer in appropriate circumstances. Id.
In August 2008, the Commission scrapped the pending proposed revision to Rule
1.5(t) and instead decided to redraft Rule
that nonrefundable fees for the performance of future services would be prohibited; (2)
lawyer , charge, or
nonrefundable fee, except that a lawyer may make an agreement for, charge
or collect a true retainer fee that is paid solely for the purpose of ensuring
the availability of the lawyer for the matter.
Aside from the posting of this 209-page Discussion of 13 proposed Rules on the state bar
website, the proposed revision to abolish nonrefundable fees, as far as we know, was not
publicized other than a short article in the May 2008 California Bar Journal that made no
mention of nonrefundable retainers. Most
that these significant changes to Rule 4-200 had been proposed. For a more
discussion of the
majority of the Bar membership, see pp. 7- supra.
10
See proposed and rejected State Bar Rule 4- 11 0
Services) and 700 (Termination of 100
Preserving Identity of Fund and
information on the proposed
the State Bar website.
151