Sorted by Commenter - Ethics - State of California

the work has been completed and after the lawyer has performed a substantial amount of
work, and then file an arbitration claim, a lawsuit, or a Bar complaint against the lawyer.
Indeed, the s 2008
effort to abolish the 5(f) in
order to preserve the current standards.
The Proposal Fails to Address The Concerns of the California
the Fair Administration of Justice and The
California Supreme Court in People v. Doolin 45 Cal. 4th 390, 460 (2009).
The Proposal fails to address the criticism of the flat fee agreements raised by the
51 and is inconsistent with
California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice
the position of two Justices of the California Supreme Court in People v. Doolin 45 Cal.
4th 390, 460 (2009), who, relying on the California Commission on Fair Administration
of Justice, stated the Court prospectively
declare fee agreements of this Proposed Rule
1.5(e)(1)-(2) does not preclude and in
include all potential legal
California Commission on Fair Administration of Justice nor the two dissenting Justices
in People v. Doolin 45 Cal. 4th 390, 460 at fn.
its comments, or by the Commission.
of these materials were brought to the Board of Governors ' attention.
51 The
. .
a group that was
chaired by former Attorney General John Van de Kamp, and whose
the current Attorney , San Mateo, and
Ventura Counties; several law enforcement officers; and members of the criminal defense
bar. People v. Doolin 45 Cal. 4th 390, 460 at fn. 1
Flat Fee Contracting" and recommended that:
52 The
indigent defense , the contract
separate funding for... investigators and I d. at 13.
Proposal to be problematic.
should be rejected. It is
who reached the "supervisory power issue" question.
People v. Doolin would unquestionably find the
181