I have a fee-division agreement with a lawyer who was later suspended. How is that lawyer's share determined?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney asked about the division of legal fees under an agreement between the attorney and another attorney that was made before the other attorney was suspended from the practice of law.

The panel took the position that the fees owed to the suspended attorney are determined by quantum meruit, based on the work performed before the suspension. The panel referred to its earlier digest of Opinion 91-71.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1992, 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, which renumbered and amended several provisions, including the fee rules. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: How is the suspended lawyer's fee share calculated?

A: Per the opinion, by quantum meruit, based on the work performed before the suspension.

Q: Does the original fee-division agreement still control?

A: Per the opinion, the panel measured the suspended attorney's share by quantum meruit for pre-suspension work rather than by the agreement's split, consistent with its earlier digest in Opinion 91-71.

Background and rules framework

The opinion cites no numbered Rule of Professional Conduct. It follows the panel's reasoning in Opinion 91-71: a lawyer suspended after a fee-division agreement was made cannot continue to work on the cases, so the suspended lawyer's compensation is measured by the fair value (quantum meruit) of services actually rendered before suspension.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• None cited. The panel resolved the inquiry on the quantum meruit principle, following Opinion 91-71.

Statutes:

• None cited.

Cases:

• None cited.

Other opinions cited:

• RI EAP Opinion 91-71 (fee division with a lawyer suspended after the agreement).

See also

• RI EAP Op. 91-71: A Fee-Division Agreement With a Lawyer Who Was Later Suspended
• RI EAP Op. 91-56: A Discharged Contingency Lawyer's Quantum Meruit Recovery

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%2092-03.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 #92-3, Request #209
Issued January 14, 1992

An attorney seeks Panel advice as to division of legal fees pursuant to an agreement between the attorney and another attorney which was made before the other attorney was suspended from the practice of law.

The Panel takes the position that the fees owed to the suspended attorney are determined by quantum meruit, based on the work performed before suspension. See digest of opinion #91-71.