What must a lawyer do when collecting payments from a judgment debtor but unable to identify the client owed the money?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1996. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current rules of professional conduct in your state, with citations.
Plain-English summary
The inquiry came from a lawyer receiving monthly payments from a judgment debtor who did not know the name of the insurance company for whom the subrogation claim was being collected.
The committee concluded that the lawyer has an obligation under RPC 1.1, 1.3, and 1.4 to make a thorough effort to identify and contact the insurance company client, including contacting a former associate or taking other necessary steps. With respect to the funds obtained from the judgment debtor, the money should be placed in a separate interest-bearing trust account under RPC 1.14. Without a fee agreement, the lawyer should take no fees out of the money paid by the judgment debtor. Finally, on the facts presented, the committee said it appears the lawyer probably did not have authority to accept a payment plan without the client's approval and may be in violation of RPC 1.2 and RPC 1.4.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1996, 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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. In the 2006 revisions Washington renumbered its safekeeping-of-property rule (the former RPC 1.14, cited here) to RPC 1.15A, tracking ABA Model Rule 1.15; confirm the current rule and citation before relying on it.
Common questions
Q: What must the lawyer do to find the unknown client?
A: The committee concluded the lawyer must make a thorough effort to identify and contact the client under RPC 1.1, 1.3, and 1.4, including contacting a former associate or taking other necessary steps.
Q: Where should the collected money go?
A: The committee said the funds should be placed in a separate interest-bearing trust account under RPC 1.14 (the safekeeping rule then so numbered in Washington).
Q: Can the lawyer take a fee from the collected funds?
A: No. The committee said that without a fee agreement with the client, the lawyer should take no fees out of the money paid by the judgment debtor.
Q: Was accepting the payment plan proper?
A: The committee said that, on the facts, the lawyer probably did not have authority to accept a payment plan without the client's approval and may be in violation of RPC 1.2 and RPC 1.4.
Background and rules framework
The opinion applied Washington's diligence and communication duties, RPC 1.1 (competence, ABA Model Rule 1.1), RPC 1.3 (diligence, ABA Model Rule 1.3), and RPC 1.4 (communication, ABA Model Rule 1.4), to the lawyer's obligation to locate the client, and the former RPC 1.14 (safekeeping of property, corresponding to ABA Model Rule 1.15, later renumbered RPC 1.15A in Washington) to the handling of the collected funds. It pointed to RPC 1.2 (scope and a client's decisions, ABA Model Rule 1.2) on the payment-plan authority question.
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- ABA Model Rule 1.1 (competence); Washington RPC 1.1
- ABA Model Rule 1.3 (diligence); Washington RPC 1.3
- ABA Model Rule 1.4 (communication); Washington RPC 1.4
- ABA Model Rule 1.15 (safekeeping property); Washington RPC 1.14
- ABA Model Rule 1.2 (scope of representation; client decisions); Washington RPC 1.2
See also
Source
- Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=1121
Original opinion text
Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.
Advisory Opinion: 1674
Year Issued: 1996
RPC(s): RPC 1.1; 1.2; 1.3; 1.4; 1.14
Subject: Lawyer accepting payments from judgment debtor and cannot identify client on whose behalf payments are received
The Committee reviewed your inquiry regarding your ethical obligations when you are receiving monthly payments from a judgment debtor but you do not know the name of the insurance company for whom the subrogation claim is being collected. The Committee decided that you have an obligation under RPC 1.1, 1.3, and 1.4 to make a thorough effort to identify and contact your insurance company client. This includes contacting your former associate or taking other steps necessary to learn the identity of this client. With respect to the funds obtained from the judgment debtor, the money should be placed in a separate interest-bearing trust account pursuant to RPC 1.14. Without a fee agreement with your client, you should take no fees out of the money paid by the judgment debtor. Finally, on the facts presented, it appears that you probably did not have authority to accept a payment plan without your client's approval and may be in violation of RPC 1.2 and RPC 1.4.
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read a 1996 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.