I took over a case from a lawyer who has since become a judge, and I'll receive one combined check for all attorneys' fees. Can I pay the judge for the legal work done before going on the bench?

Plain-English summary

On being appointed to the bench, a former practicing attorney referred a pending criminal-injuries-compensation case to the inquiring attorney, who handled it to completion. Payment of attorneys' fees from the compensation fund was pending, the predecessor attorney had performed specified legal services and was entitled to a fee for them, and the General Treasurer would not issue separate checks. The inquiring attorney would therefore receive a single payment covering the total fees, including the amount due the predecessor, and appeared before the now-judge in the course of practice. The attorney asked whether it violated the Rules to pay a former counsel, now a judge, for legal services performed before becoming a judge.

The panel concluded that it did not. On receiving funds in which a client or third person has an interest, an attorney has Rule 1.15(b) obligations to notify, deliver, and account promptly, and the panel found the attorney had no less an obligation to predecessor counsel because of the appointment to the bench. Payment of a fee to the judge for the pre-appointment legal services was consistent with the Rules provided the fee was based on the fair value of the services rendered. The panel expressly limited its guidance to interpreting the Rules of Professional Conduct and did not address the Code of Judicial Conduct or any other rules or laws bearing on the inquiry.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in July 1997, after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988, and it applies Rules 1.15 and 1.5 as originally adopted. The Rhode Island Supreme Court later revised the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2007 as part of the nationwide Ethics 2000 process. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Can a lawyer pay a sitting judge for legal work the judge did as a lawyer?

A: The opinion concluded it is not a violation of the Rules to pay a judge for legal services performed on the case before the judge's appointment, so long as the fee reflects the fair value of those services.

Q: What obligation does the successor lawyer owe the predecessor?

A: The opinion applied Rule 1.15(b): on receiving funds in which a third person has an interest, the lawyer must notify, deliver, and account promptly, and that duty was unchanged by the predecessor's move to the bench.

Q: Did the panel address judicial-conduct concerns?

A: No. The opinion expressly limited its guidance to the Rules of Professional Conduct and did not address the Code of Judicial Conduct or other laws.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct 1.15(b) and 1.5(e). Rule 1.15(b) governs a lawyer's duties on receiving funds in which a client or third person has an interest. Rule 1.5(e) governs the division of a fee between lawyers not in the same firm. The panel tied the permissibility of the payment to the fee being based on the fair value of the predecessor's services, citing its General Informational Opinion No. 7 and Opinion 93-37.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Model Rule 1.15 / RI RPC 1.15(b) (funds in which a third person has an interest)
• Model Rule 1.5 / RI RPC 1.5(e) (division of fees between lawyers)

Other opinions cited:

• RI EAP General Informational Opinion No. 7 (Apr. 10, 1997): Rule 1.15(b) duties on receiving funds in which a third person has an interest
• RI EAP Op. 93-37 (1993): fee based on the fair value of services rendered

See also

• RI EAP Op. 97-16: A referral fee requires a joint-responsibility writing
• RI EAP Op. 97-17: Protecting disputed medical-bill funds in trust

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%2097-12.pdf

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

Final
RHODE ISLAND SUPREME COURT
ETHICS ADVISORY PANEL
Opinion No. 97-12, Request No. 715
Issued July 10, 1997
Facts:

    Upon his/her appointment to the bench, a former practicing attorney referred a pending

criminal injuries compensation case to the inquiring attorney who handled the matter to comple-
tion. Payment for attorneys' fees out of the criminal injuries compensation fund is pending. The
inquiring attorney states that the former attorney had performed specified legal services on the
case and is entitled to a fee for those services. The General Treasurer will not prepare separate
checks for each of the attorneys. Consequently, the inquiring attorney will receive a single pay-
ment for the total attorneys' fees for the case, including the fees due to the predecessor attorney.
The inquiring attorney appears before the judge during the course of his/her practice.

Issue Presented:

    The inquiring attorney asks whether it is a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct

for a successor attorney to pay a former counsel, who is now a judge, for legal services that
counsel provided on the case prior to becoming a judge.

Opinion:

    It is not a violation of the Rules for a successor attorney to pay attorneys' fees to a judge

for legal services he/she performed on the case before becoming a judge.

Reasoning:

   The attorneys' fees that the inquiring attorney will receive unquestionably include

amounts due to predecessor counsel who performed legal services on the case before being ap-
pointed to the bench. Upon receiving funds in which a client or a third person has an interest, an
attorney has obligations imposed by Rule 1.15(b) to notify promptly, to deliver promptly, and to
account. See R.I. Sup. Ct. Ethics Advisory Panel General Informational Opinion No. 7 (Apr. 10,
1997). The inquiring attorney has no less an obligation to predecessor counsel by reason of
counsel's appointment to the bench.

    The Panel concludes that payment of an attorney's fee to the judge for legal services

he/she performed on the case is consistent with the Rules of Professional Conduct provided that
the fee is based on the fair value of services he/she rendered on the case. See, Rule 1.5(e); R.I.
Sup. Ct. Ethics Advisory Panel Op. 93-37 (1993). The Panel's guidance is restricted to inter-
pretations of the Rules of Professional Conduct and does not extend to issues under the Code
of Judicial Conduct or any other rules, regulations, or laws that may have a bearing on the issues
raised by this inquiry.