Ethics Opinion Discourages Streamlined Contingency Arrangement
Communicating with a client may be a “time laden process,” but it’s a necessary part of a contingent fee representation, according to an Ohio ethics opinion.
In an effort to streamline a contingent fee case, a lawyer might be tempted to obtain a power of attorney so he or she can make decisions and sign papers on a client’s behalf, according to the opinion by the Supreme Court of Ohio’s Board of Commissioners on Grievances & Discipline. But the benefits don’t outweigh the ethical risks, the advisory opinion (PDF) says.
A decision to settle should be made by the client, not the lawyer, according to the opinion. Also, lawyers have a duty to explain matters to clients so they can give informed consent, the opinion continues. It is unlikely that a lawyer can obtain informed consent at the start of a matter when the facts aren’t fully developed.
“At a client’s signing of a contingent fee agreement with a lawyer, there is no crystal ball,” the opinion says.
The Legal Profession Blog noted the opinion.
