Could an employee pay counsel's grievance fee when the union owed it but could not pay?

Plain-English summary

A lawyer represented both a union and one of its employees in a grievance. The union was responsible for fees but could not pay; the employee offered to pay and later seek union reimbursement.

The opinion allowed that arrangement if the employee waived the Rule 1.8(a) conflict in writing after full disclosure.

Currency note

This 1993 opinion predates Missouri's 2007 amendments to its Rules of Professional Conduct. An official reference note identifies July 1, 2007 amendments to Rules 4-1.9 and 4-1.10. Subsequent rule amendments or later opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context and verify current rules before relying on it.

Common questions

Q: Was employee payment permitted?

A: Yes, under the stated written waiver condition.

Q: Who originally owed the lawyer's fees?

A: The union, according to the question.

Q: What consent did the opinion require?

A: The employee's written waiver after full disclosure of the Rule 1.8(a) conflict.

Background and rules framework

The opinion addressed fee payment by an employee jointly represented with the union in a grievance and cited Rule 1.8(a).

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Missouri Rule 1.8(a)

See also

• Missouri Informal Op. 2018-12: Third-party fee payment
• Missouri Informal Op. 930153: Employer payment for drivers

Source

• Landing page: https://mo-legal-ethics.org/informal-opinion/930115/

Original opinion text

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

QUESTION: Attorney represents a union and one of its employees in a grievance proceeding. Union is responsible for the fees. Union cannot pay the fees. The employee is willing to pay the fees and be reimbursed by the union. May the attorney accept payment from the employee? ANSWER: Yes, if the employees waives the Rule 1.8(a) conflict in writing after full disclosure.