Can a lawyer hold a client's papers until the fee is paid, and does a bankruptcy discharge wipe out that lien?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry concerned whether a lawyer may condition return of the client's papers on payment of the fee, and whether such a lien is extinguished in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy. The committee was of the opinion that the question of whether a discharge in bankruptcy extinguishes an attorney's lien is a legal question the committee could not answer.

The committee was further of the opinion that if the answer to the legal question were that the lien survives a discharge in bankruptcy, then a lawyer may assert such a lien subject to the ethical obligations imposed by RPC 1.15.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1986, before the 2006 revisions to the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct. The declining-or-terminating-representation provisions then in RPC 1.15, including the duty regarding a client's papers, correspond to Model Rule 1.16 and were later renumbered and amended. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Can a lawyer hold a client's papers until the fee is paid?

A: Per the opinion, a lawyer may assert such a lien only if it survives as a matter of law, and even then subject to the ethical obligations imposed by RPC 1.15.

Q: Does a Chapter 7 bankruptcy discharge extinguish the lien?

A: The committee was of the opinion that whether a discharge in bankruptcy extinguishes an attorney's lien is a legal question it could not answer.

Q: If the lien survives bankruptcy, can the lawyer assert it?

A: The committee was of the opinion that if the lien survives a discharge in bankruptcy, the lawyer may assert it, subject to the ethical obligations imposed by RPC 1.15.

Background and rules framework

The opinion addresses an attorney's retaining lien on a client's papers under Washington RPC 1.15, the declining-or-terminating-representation rule as then numbered, corresponding to Model Rule 1.16. The committee separated the underlying legal question (whether a bankruptcy discharge extinguishes the lien), which it declined to answer, from the ethical question (how a lawyer may assert a surviving lien), which it tied to RPC 1.15.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Washington RPC 1.15 (declining or terminating representation, as then numbered), corresponding to Model Rule 1.16.

See also

• WSBA Ethics Op. 933: an attorney's lien and retention of client papers
• WSBA Ethics Op. 910: an attorney's lien on client files and property
• WSBA Ethics Op. 1037: an attorney's lien for prior fees against new-matter funds

Source

• Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=171

Original opinion text

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

Advisory Opinion: 1060
Year Issued: 1986
RPC(s): RPC 1.15
Subject: Attorney's lien on client's papers

The inquiry concerned whether a lawyer may condition return of his client's papers upon payment of his fee and if such a lien is extinguished in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy. The Committee was of the opinion that the question of whether a discharge in bankruptcy extinguishes an attorney's lien is a legal question which the Committee cannot answer. The Committee was further of the opinion that if the answer to the legal question were that the lien survives a discharge to the bankruptcy, then a lawyer may assert such a lien subject to the ethical obligations imposed by RPC 1.15.