When a statute changes, does a lawyer have to tell current and former clients about it?

Plain-English summary

A lawyer asked what ethical obligations arose from an amendment to RCW 6.17.020, a statute the committee described as allowing a ten-year extension beyond the original validity of a judgment, and specifically what duty an attorney now has to advise clients about extending the validity of their judgments.

The committee gave a four-part answer. First, a lawyer currently and actively representing a client on a matter to which the statute is relevant has an affirmative duty under RPC 1.1 and 1.4 to notify the client of the possible impact of the change. Second, once representation ends (for example, the lawyer has sent a termination letter or the client has discharged the lawyer), there is no duty to notify the client absent a specific retainer to the contrary. Third, where the attorney was specifically retained to obtain a money judgment and the representation was not limited in scope or terminated in a manner that clearly precludes the client's reliance on the attorney for post-judgment advice, the attorney has a duty to make reasonable efforts to notify the client of the amendment that may extend the client's interest in the judgment for an additional ten years. Fourth, the committee said the scope of representation turns on a question of law, and whether there is current active representation depends on the client's reasonable belief about the scope of representation, a question of fact and law.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1995, before the Washington State Bar Association's adoption of the 2006 revisions to the Rules of Professional Conduct. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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, including the terms of RCW 6.17.020, which may have changed since 1995. RPC 1.1 and 1.4 correspond to ABA Model Rules 1.1 (competence) and 1.4 (communication).

Common questions

Q: If I am still representing a client, must I tell them about a relevant statute change?

A: Yes. The committee said a lawyer actively representing a client on a matter to which the statute is relevant has an affirmative duty under RPC 1.1 and 1.4 to notify the client of the possible impact.

Q: Do I have to track down former clients after representation ends?

A: The committee said that once representation ends there is no duty to notify the client of the statute's impact absent a specific retainer to the contrary.

Q: What about a client I was retained to get a money judgment for?

A: The committee said that if the attorney was specifically retained to obtain a money judgment, and the representation was not limited or clearly terminated so as to preclude the client's reliance for post-judgment advice, the attorney has a duty to make reasonable efforts to notify the client of the amendment.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied RPC 1.1 (competence) and RPC 1.4 (communication), corresponding to ABA Model Rules 1.1 and 1.4, to the question of advising clients about an amendment to RCW 6.17.020 on judgment extensions. The committee tied the duty to notify to whether an active attorney-client relationship still exists and to the scope for which the lawyer was retained.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• ABA Model Rule 1.1 (competence); Washington RPC 1.1
• ABA Model Rule 1.4 (communication); Washington RPC 1.4

Statutes:

• RCW 6.17.020 (extension of the validity of a judgment)

See also

• WA Ethics Op. 1601: Advising a Client and Witnesses in a Criminal Case

Source

• Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=682

Original opinion text

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

Advisory Opinion: 1600
Year Issued: 1995
RPC(s): RPC 1.1, 1.4; RCW 6.17.020
Subject: Duty to notify former clients of change in law

The Committee discussed your inquiry regarding what ethical obligations are created by recent legislative changes to RCW 6.17.020. This amendment to the statute allows for a ten-year extension above and beyond the original validity of a judgment. Specifically, what obligation does an attorney now have to advise clients of the possibility of extending the validity of their judgments because of this extension.

It was the Committee's opinion that: (1) If you are currently actively representing a client on a matter in which this statute has relevance, then you have an affirmative duty to notify the client under RPC 1.1 and 1.4 of the possible impact of this change in the statute. (2) Once representation ends (e.g., in a matter in which either the lawyer has sent a letter of termination to the client, or the client has discharged the lawyer), there is no duty to notify the client of the impact of this change in the statute absent a specific retainer to the contrary. (3) In a matter in which an attorney was specifically retained to obtain a money judgment, and in which the lawyer's representation has not been limited in scope or terminated in a manner that clearly precludes the clients' reliance on the attorney for post-judgment advice, the attorney has a duty to make reasonable efforts to notify the client of the amendment to RCW 6.17.020 that may extend the client's beneficial interest in that judgment for an additional ten years. (4) The question of what is the scope of representation in a particular case will turn on a question of law. Whether there is current active representation depends on what is the client's reasonable belief regarding the scope of representation and is a question of fact and law.