Can a Washington lawyer put a clause in a fee agreement letting the lawyer stop all work if the client falls 30 days behind on fees?

Plain-English summary

The lawyer asked about proposed fee-agreement language stating that if any balance remained unpaid for more than 30 days, the attorney reserved the right to do no further work on the matter, with or without withdrawing, and regardless of the effect on the outcome. The committee concluded that this language does not meet the minimum standards set in the Rules of Professional Conduct, and that a lawyer is prohibited from putting into a fee agreement anything that violates the RPCs.

The committee added that the contemplated language does not constitute a proper withdrawal under RPC 1.15. If the lawyer does withdraw, the lawyer must comply with RPC 1.15(d). Doing nothing does not comply with RPC 1.3 or 1.15, because an attorney has an obligation to represent the client diligently until the attorney has properly withdrawn under RPC 1.15.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1997, 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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. Washington's cited rules correspond to ABA Model Rules 1.3 (diligence) and, for then-numbered RPC 1.15 (declining or terminating representation, later renumbered RPC 1.16), Model Rule 1.16.

Common questions

Q: Can a fee agreement let the lawyer stop work if the client is 30 days behind?

A: The committee concluded the clause does not meet the minimum standards of the Rules of Professional Conduct, and a lawyer cannot put language that violates the RPCs into a fee agreement.

Q: Does stopping work count as withdrawing?

A: No. The committee said the contemplated language does not constitute a proper withdrawal under RPC 1.15; if the lawyer withdraws, the lawyer must comply with RPC 1.15(d).

Q: What does the lawyer owe the client until then?

A: An attorney has an obligation to represent the client diligently until properly withdrawn under RPC 1.15; doing nothing does not comply with RPC 1.3 or 1.15.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied RPC 1.3 (diligence, corresponding to ABA Model Rule 1.3) and then-RPC 1.15 (declining or terminating representation, corresponding to ABA Model Rule 1.16 and later renumbered RPC 1.16) to a proposed fee clause permitting the lawyer to cease work on nonpayment. The committee treated the diligence duty as continuing until a proper withdrawal, and identified RPC 1.15(d) as governing the protective steps required when a lawyer does withdraw.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• ABA Model Rule 1.3 (diligence); Washington RPC 1.3
• ABA Model Rule 1.16 (declining or terminating representation); Washington RPC 1.15, 1.15(d) (later renumbered RPC 1.16)

See also

• WA Ethics Op. 1301: Court-Ordered Continued Representation
• WA Ethics Op. 1169: Court Denies Withdrawal Before Trial
• WA Ethics Op. 1120: Returning a Signed Release

Source

• Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=795

Original opinion text

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

Advisory Opinion: 1721
Year Issued: 1997
RPC(s): RPC 1.3; 1.15
Subject: Diligence; duties upon withdrawal; fee agreement permitting lawyer to cease work in case of nonpayment of fees

[The lawyer asked about the propriety of the following language in a fee agreement: "If any balance remains unpaid for more than 30 days, attorney reserves the right to do no further work on the matter, with or without withdrawing as attorney, and regardless of the effect it may have upon the outcome of the above matter."] The Committee has proposed that the fee language does not meet the minimum standards set forth in the Rules of Professional Conduct and you are prohibited from putting into a fee agreement that which is in violation of the RPCs. In addition, the language in the contemplated fee agreement does not constitute a proper withdrawal under RPC 1.15. If you do withdraw, you must comply with RPC 1.15(d). Doing nothing does not comply with RPC 1.3 or 1.15. An attorney has an obligation to represent the client diligently until the attorney has properly withdrawn under RPC 1.15.