Can a Minnesota lawyer accept a gratuity from a court reporting service the client pays for?

Plain-English summary

The opinion addresses gratuities offered to lawyers (or their non-lawyer staff) by court reporting services and other similar services whose charges the client is expected to pay. It concludes that a lawyer ought not to accept, or permit a non-lawyer employee to accept, such a gratuity unless the client consents after consultation.

The opinion draws a line for trivial items. It states that a lawyer may accept nominal gifts, such as pens, coffee mugs, and other similar advertising-type gifts, without the client's consent. The opinion cites Rules 1.4, 1.5(a), 1.8(f)(1), and 5.3, and the definition of "consult" or related terms in Rule 1.0(c).

In practice

Under this opinion, a Minnesota lawyer should obtain the client's consent after consultation before accepting a gratuity from a court reporting or similar service whose charges fall on the client, and should ensure non-lawyer staff do the same. The opinion treats nominal advertising-type items, such as pens or mugs, as outside that consent requirement.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer accept a gratuity from a court reporting service the client pays for?

A: Not without consent. The opinion states a lawyer ought not accept such a gratuity unless the client consents after consultation.

Q: Does the rule apply to the lawyer's staff?

A: Yes. The opinion states a lawyer ought not permit a non-lawyer employee to accept such a gratuity either, consistent with the lawyer's supervisory duty under Rule 5.3.

Q: Are small promotional gifts allowed?

A: Yes. The opinion permits nominal gifts such as pens, coffee mugs, and similar advertising-type gifts without the client's consent.

Background and rules framework

The opinion ties together several Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct: Rule 1.4 on communication, Rule 1.5(a) on reasonable fees, Rule 1.8(f)(1) on accepting compensation or benefits affecting the representation, and Rule 5.3 on responsibilities regarding non-lawyer assistance, along with the terminology in Rule 1.0(c). The concern is that a benefit flowing to the lawyer from a service the client pays for can affect the lawyer's judgment and the client's costs. It was adopted in 1993 and last amended in January 2006.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 1.4 (communication); MR 1.5 (fees); MR 1.8 (conflicts: current clients, specific rules); MR 5.3 (non-lawyer assistance)
• Minnesota RPC 1.0(c), 1.4, 1.5(a), 1.8(f)(1), and 5.3

See also

No sibling opinions yet indexed.

Source

• Landing page: https://lprb.mncourts.gov/lawyers-professional-responsibility-board-opinions/
• Original PDF: https://lprb.mncourts.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Opinion-17_compressed.pdf

Original opinion text

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

LAWYERS PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY BOARD
OPINION NO. 17
ACCEPTING GRATUITIES FROM COURT REPORTING SERVICES
AND OTHER SIMILAR SERVICES
A lawyer ought not to accept, or to permit any nonlawyer employee to accept, a gratuity offered by a court reporting service or other similar service for which a client is expected to pay unless the client consents after consultation. However, a lawyer may accept nominal gifts, such as pens, coffee mugs, and other similar advertising-type gifts without consent of the client. See Rules 1.4, 1.5(a), 1.8(f)(1) and 5.3, Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct (MRPC). See also Rule 1.0(c), MRPC. Adopted: June 18, 1993. Amended: January 26, 2006.