Ezel / Ethics Opinions / JUDICIAL-IL

Could an Illinois judge receive a referral fee under an agreement made before taking the bench?

Short answer Yes, the modified opinion allowed a fee based on the pre-bench referral and assumed financial responsibility, if the written fee-sharing arrangement met the stated conditions and the judge provided no post-bench legal services.
Bar
JUDICIAL-IL
Issued
1994

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1994. Ask about yours and see what the current rules of professional conduct in your state say for your facts, with citations.

Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official ethics opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

Plain-English summary

Before becoming a judge, a lawyer referred a personal-injury client to another lawyer. The case settled after the referring lawyer joined the bench, without further work by that judge. The opinion examined a referral-fee agreement based on the referral and shared legal responsibility.

As modified on January 31, 1995, the Committee allowed the judge to receive the fee if the written arrangement met former Illinois Rule of Professional Conduct 1.5(f) and (g). It interpreted the referring lawyer’s continuing responsibility as potential financial responsibility, not post-bench legal services prohibited by former judicial Rule 65F.

The opinion also permitted an agreement releasing the judge from future responsibility in exchange for surrendering the fee. A reduced payment coupled with release was permissible only within the opinion’s limits: responsibility for earlier work could not be released, and payment could not exceed the value of the referral and responsibility assumed before judicial service.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1994 and modified on January 31, 1995, under the 1993 Illinois Code of Judicial Conduct. The Committee’s archive says that Code was superseded on January 1, 2023, and does not assess the effect of the 2023 Code. Treat this page as historical context and verify the current Code before relying on its analysis.

Common questions

Q: Could the judge accept a fee earned from the earlier referral?

A: Yes, if the written arrangement met the opinion’s fee-sharing conditions and no post-bench legal work was performed.

Q: Did assumed legal responsibility amount to practicing law?

A: The Committee treated the responsibility under that type of referral agreement as financial liability, rather than law practice.

Q: Could the client release the judge from future responsibility?

A: Yes. The opinion described full fee relinquishment or a limited reduced-payment agreement, subject to its stated conditions.

Background and rules framework

The modified opinion interpreted former judicial Rules 65C and 65F together with then-current Illinois lawyer Rules 1.5(f), 1.5(g), and 5.1. Its analysis of a referral-only agreement depended on written client consent and on the distinction between financial liability and providing legal services.

Citations and references

  • Illinois Supreme Court Rules 65C and 65F; Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct 1.5 and 5.1.
  • IJEC Opinion 94-12; Chicago Bar Association Professional Responsibility Opinions 82-5 and 87-2; Michigan Informal Opinion CI-923.

See also

Source

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 1994. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state against your situation and cites the rules it relies on.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace