Sorted by Commenter - Ethics - State of California

Sorted by Commenter - Ethics - State of California Sorted by Commenter - Ethics - State of California

ethics.calbar.ca.gov
from ethics.calbar.ca.gov More from this publisher
10.08.2013 Views

nonrefundable retainer "more palatable" to their critics. 15 This novel and convoluted fee arrangement appears at first to nonrefundable" flat fee which constitute() complete payment for those services" so long as agreement that states , " in a manner that can easily be understood by the client " a number of things including: "(v) that the client may be entitled to a refund of a portion of the fee if the agreed-upon legal services have not been completed." The paragraph (e )(2) is that if any portion nonrefundable" fee "may be" refundable, then the entire fee cannot be the lawyer s property. The less obvious but equally troubling problem is that when read in context of the entire Rule and Comment (S), Paragraph (e)(2) would often require that the presumably nonrefundable" flat fee l6 Particularly in including trial. , since this flat fee is contingencies eLe. trial or reasonably predicted prior to being retained, the significant portion of the flat fee that covers these contingencies is refundable, at least until the time that occur. If the trial or the case resolved before trial, the fees that would have have to be refunded (either on a pre-tax or post-tax basis) 17 15 Following public comment in 2008 , there memoranda between the drafting subcommittee criticism of the 5et) (prior attempt to retainers). Among them is an August 13, 2008 Memorandum from Paul Vapnek to the members of the Commission where he asks whether there is anything the Commission could do to "make the bitter pill more palatable to our critics?" 16 See detailed discussion at pp. 27- infra. 17 Lawyers may have to pay income tax on the "nonrefundable" flat fee paid when received from the client even though it may be refundable. 18 One flat fee" or " fixed fee" that is earned when received is to assure the client in advance that the fee will be no more than a particular amount. Many clients who have become relatively sophisticated consumers of legal services do not want fees calculated or based determined based on fixed values for differently and the " fixed fee" is often an educated but fair estimate, since there is no way to determine how or when, for example, a civil litigation or criminal case will be resolved. 156

" " On , Paragraph flat fees" as the nonrefundable effort to dress up the ban on palatable to the critics fails and client. See discussion in section (E) below with section (e The Proposal is A Solution in Search of A Problem. The Proposal problem. There simply from the which would be remedied by ~ change. With , the , I Commission offers a one-sentence rationale ancient cases: Paragraph (e) has no Commission nonrefundable fee is inimical to California s strong policy of 19 In support , the seventy-plus year old nonrefundable retainers; rather, they both dealt with the unconscionability standard. See Agenda Item re: Proposed New and Amended Rules of Professional Conduct of the State Bar of California, Batches 1 , 2, and 3 - , Attachment 1 64 (October 23 , 2009); Herrscher v. State Bar Cal. 2d 399, 402 (1934) and Goldstone v. State Bar 214 Cal. 490, 498 (1931). was: 20 The Although we professional services may with judgment of the attorney performing the services, we are of the opinion that if a fee is charged so exorbitant and wholly disproportionate to the services performed as to shock the called, such a case warrants disciplinary action by this court. 20 The ABA Model nonrefundable fees" and "earned upon receipt fees. See also RESTATEMENT (THIRD) OF THE 944, cmt.(fJ (2000) ("if a payment to a lawyer is a flat fee paid in advance rather deposit out of which fees will be paid as they , the payment belongs to the lawyer" and need not be deposited in a client trust account). 157

nonrefundable retainer "more palatable" to their critics.<br />

15 This novel and convoluted fee<br />

arrangement appears at first to nonrefundable" flat fee which<br />

constitute() complete payment for those services" so long as<br />

agreement that states<br />

, "<br />

in a manner that can easily be understood <strong>by</strong> the client " a number<br />

<strong>of</strong> things including: "(v) that the client may be entitled to a refund <strong>of</strong> a portion <strong>of</strong> the fee<br />

if the agreed-upon legal services have not been completed." The<br />

paragraph (e )(2) is that if any portion nonrefundable" fee "may be" refundable, then<br />

the entire fee cannot be the lawyer s property.<br />

The less obvious but equally troubling problem is that when read in context <strong>of</strong> the<br />

entire Rule and Comment (S), Paragraph (e)(2) would <strong>of</strong>ten require that the presumably<br />

nonrefundable" flat fee<br />

l6 Particularly in<br />

including trial.<br />

, since this flat fee is<br />

contingencies eLe. trial or<br />

reasonably predicted prior to being retained, the significant portion <strong>of</strong> the flat fee that<br />

covers these contingencies is refundable, at least until the time that<br />

occur. If the<br />

trial or the case resolved before trial, the fees that would have<br />

have to be refunded (either on a pre-tax or post-tax basis) 17<br />

15 Following public comment in 2008 , there<br />

memoranda between the drafting subcommittee<br />

criticism <strong>of</strong> the 5et) (prior attempt to<br />

retainers). Among them is an August 13, 2008 Memorandum from Paul Vapnek to the<br />

members <strong>of</strong> the Commission where he asks whether there is anything the Commission<br />

could do to "make the bitter pill more palatable to our critics?"<br />

16<br />

See detailed discussion at pp. 27- infra.<br />

17 Lawyers<br />

may have to pay income tax on the "nonrefundable" flat fee paid when received from the<br />

client even though it may be refundable.<br />

18 One<br />

flat fee" or " fixed fee" that is earned when received is to<br />

assure the client in advance that the fee will be no more than a particular amount. Many<br />

clients who have become relatively sophisticated consumers <strong>of</strong> legal services do not want<br />

fees calculated or based<br />

determined based on fixed values for<br />

differently and the " fixed fee" is <strong>of</strong>ten an educated but fair estimate, since there is no way<br />

to determine how or when, for example, a civil litigation or<br />

criminal case will be resolved.<br />

156

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!