Are members of a bar association's fee arbitration committee excused from the duty to report ethical misconduct they learn about while serving on the committee?

Plain-English summary

The opinion addressed fee arbitration committees operated by various bar associations, which resolve fee disputes between clients and attorneys, and disputes between attorneys over fees or fee division, through settlement or binding arbitration under the Uniform Arbitration Act, T.C.A. Section 29-5-301 et seq. The Board described these committees as giving the public a convenient, impartial forum for fee disputes and helping keep down litigation over fees, with both parties agreeing in writing to submit the dispute to arbitration and only limited rights of appeal from the panel's decision.

The Board recognized that attorneys might be reluctant to serve on or participate before a fee arbitration panel because Disciplinary Rule 1-103 of the Code of Professional Responsibility otherwise required mandatory reporting of ethical misconduct an attorney became aware of. To encourage greater participation and cooperation in the fee arbitration process, the opinion excused fee arbitration panel members from the duty to report ethical misconduct discovered during the course of their service as a panel member.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1989, before Tennessee's adoption of the 2003 Rules of Professional Conduct, which replaced the former Code of Professional Responsibility. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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, deadline, or requirement mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Did a Tennessee lawyer serving on a fee arbitration committee have to report misconduct learned through that service?

A: No. The opinion excused fee arbitration panel members from the DR 1-103 duty to report ethical misconduct discovered in the course of their committee service.

Q: Why did the Board create this exemption?

A: The opinion reasoned that attorneys might otherwise be reluctant to participate in the peer fee-arbitration process because of the mandatory reporting requirement, and that encouraging greater participation and cooperation in fee arbitration justified the exemption.

Q: What kind of disputes did the fee arbitration committees the opinion addressed handle?

A: The opinion described committees resolving fee disputes between clients and attorneys, and fee or fee-division disputes between attorneys, through settlement or binding arbitration under Tennessee's Uniform Arbitration Act, with limited rights of appeal.

Background and rules framework

The opinion addressed former DR 1-103 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, which imposed a mandatory duty to report known ethical misconduct. The modern analog is Model Rule 8.3 / Tennessee RPC 8.3 (reporting professional misconduct).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct (former Code):

• DR 1-103 (mandatory duty to report known ethical misconduct). Modern analog: Model Rule 8.3 / Tennessee RPC 8.3

Statutes:

• T.C.A. Section 29-5-301 et seq. (Uniform Arbitration Act, governing fee arbitration committee decisions and limited appeal rights)

See also

• Tenn. Ethics Op. 91-F-126: Confidentiality and Reporting in a Bar Colleagues Mentoring Program
• NYC Bar Op. 1990-3: Mandatory Duty to Report Misconduct Under DR 1-103(A)
• ISBA Op. 90-28: Duty to Report Triggered by Actual Knowledge

Source

• Landing page: https://www.tbpr.org/ethic_opinions/89-F-119

Original opinion text

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

89-F-119 - Fee Dispute Committee members excused from duty to report

BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE

FORMAL ETHICS OPINION 89-F-119

Fee arbitration committee members of the various bar associations are excused from their ethical obligation to report ethical misconduct discovered during the course of their service as a fee arbitration committee member.

Fee arbitration committees are designed to resolve, through settlement or arbitration, disputes between clients and attorneys concerning fees for legal services. This affords members of the public with a convenient forum for an impartial review of a fee dispute with an attorney, and also affords assistance to attorneys in settling controversies with other attorneys regarding legal fees or division of fees. The arbitration process generally helps to keep down litigation over fees. The bar association committees arbitrate and decide fee disputes upon the written agreement of both parties to submit the dispute to arbitration. The decision of the panel is binding with only limited rights of appeal in accordance with the Uniform Arbitration Act, T.C.A. Section 29-5-301, et seq.

The Board recognizes that in some instances attorneys may be reluctant to participate in the peer arbitration process due to the mandatory reporting of ethical misconduct provisions of Disciplinary Rule 1-103 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.

Therefore, in order to encourage greater participation and cooperation in the fee arbitration process, panel members are excused from the ethical requirement to report ethical misconduct during the course of service as a panel member.

This 8th day of August, 1989.

ETHICS COMMITTEE:

Cornelia A. Clark

Cecil D. Branstetter

Jerry C. Colley

APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD