I collected a lien pay-off owed to a client I filed suit for years ago, but I can't locate him despite calling, mailing to his last known address, and requesting a postal check. What else must I do, and what happens to the money if I can't find him?

Plain-English summary

About ten years before the inquiry, the attorney filed suit on behalf of his client, Mr. X, to collect a $1,000 debt owed by Mr. Y, obtained judgment, and recorded an execution against Mr. Y's real estate. Several weeks before the inquiry, Mr. Y's attorney contacted the inquiring attorney requesting the payoff amount on the lien, including interest and costs, to clear title for an immediate sale. The attorney attempted to reach Mr. X by telephone and found no current listing in his name, mailed a letter to Mr. X's last known address that was returned "addressee unknown," and requested a postal check on Mr. X but had not yet received a response. The attorney accepted the lien payoff, signed a release of the lien, and asked that the funds be held in escrow pending disbursement of the sale proceeds. The attorney asked the panel, first, whether further steps were needed in his search for Mr. X, and second, what he should do with the funds if he could not locate him.

The panel held that the attorney's attempts to contact Mr. X by telephone and telephone company records, by mail, and by postal check satisfy his obligation to exercise diligence in locating Mr. X under these circumstances, while noting that the panel's response would differ under different circumstances; for example, if the attorney knew Mr. X to be mentally incapacitated, greater efforts would be required to satisfy the obligation to contact him. The panel held that if the attorney is unable to locate Mr. X by the methods described, the funds due to him should be paid into the Registry of Court pursuant to District Court Civil Rule 67.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in May 1990, after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988. The Rhode Island Supreme Court later revised the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2007 as part of the nationwide Ethics 2000 process, and District Court Civil Rule 67 may have been amended since 1990. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule or procedure mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: What steps does the panel consider sufficient diligence to locate a missing client owed funds?

A: The panel held that attempting to contact the client by telephone and telephone company records, by mail to the last known address, and by requesting a postal check satisfies the obligation to exercise diligence in locating him under these circumstances.

Q: Does the required diligence change if I know something about the client's circumstances, like a disability?

A: Yes. The panel noted that its response would differ under different circumstances; if the attorney knew the client to be mentally incapacitated, for example, greater efforts would be required to satisfy the obligation to contact him.

Q: What should I do with client funds if I can't locate the client after diligent efforts?

A: The panel held that if the attorney is unable to locate the client by the methods described, the funds due to him should be paid into the Registry of Court pursuant to District Court Civil Rule 67.

Background and rules framework

The opinion does not cite a specific Rule of Professional Conduct by number; it addresses an attorney's diligence obligations regarding escrowed client funds and directs, per District Court Civil Rule 67, that unclaimed funds be paid into the Registry of Court after diligent but unsuccessful efforts to locate the client.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• None cited by number in the digest.

Statutes:

• Rhode Island District Court Civil Rule 67, cited for paying unclaimed client funds into the Registry of Court.

Cases:

• None cited.

Other opinions cited:

• None cited.

See also

• AL Bar Op. 1990-08: Unclaimed Client Trust Funds, Lawyer's Obligation to Ascertain True Owner, Escheatment

Source

• Landing page: https://www.courts.ri.gov/attorney-resources/Pages/Ethics-Advisory-Panel-default.aspx
• Original PDF: https://www.courts.ri.gov/Opinions/EAP%2090-21.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

DIGEST OF ETHICS ADVISORY PANEL
OPINION 90-21, REQUEST #160
Issued May 31, 1990

An attorney seeks Panel advice as to what he ought to do with certain client funds under the circumstances he describes.

The attorney advises the Panel that approximately ten years ago he filed a law suit on behalf of his client, Mr. X, to collect on a one thousand dollar debt owed to Mr. X by Mr. Y. The attorney states that he obtained judgment against Mr. Y, an execution issued and that execution was recorded against Mr. Y's real estate.

Several weeks ago the attorney indicates that he was contacted by the attorney for Mr. Y, requesting the amount of the pay off on the lien, including all interest and costs in order to clear title to the property for immediate sale. The attorney states that he attempted to contact Mr. X by telephone and learned that there is no current phone listing in his name. The attorney mailed a letter to Mr. X's last known address and it was returned "addressee unknown." The attorney indicates that he has requested a postal check on Mr. X but has not yet received a response.

The attorney advises the Panel that he accepted the pay-off of the lien, signed a release of the lien on the real estate and requested the funds be held in an escrow account pending disbursement of the proceeds of sale. The attorney asks the Panel, first, if there are any further steps he needs to take in connection with his search for Mr. X. Second, the attorney asks what he should do with the funds due to Mr. X if he cannot locate him.

The Panel takes the position that the attorney's attempts to contact Mr. X by telephone and telephone company records, by mail, and by postal check satisfy his obligations to exercise diligence in locating Mr. X under the circumstances. The Panel's response to this portion of the inquiry would, of course, differ under different circumstances. If the attorney knew Mr. X to be mentally incapacitated, for example, greater efforts would be required on the attorney's part to satisfy his obligation to contact Mr. X. If the attorney is unable to locate Mr. X by the methods he has described, the funds due to Mr. X should be paid into the Registry of Court pursuant to District Court Civil Rule 67.

Ethics Advisory Panel advice is protective in nature. There is no requirement that an attorney abide by a Panel opinion, but if he or she does, he or she is fully protected from any charge of impropriety.