NYC-BAR 1997

Can a lawyer charge a contingent-fee client interest on litigation expenses the lawyer advanced and financed by a bank loan?

Short answer: Yes, with limits. The opinion concluded a lawyer may charge a client interest on advanced litigation expenses to recover the lawyer's own bank borrowing cost, so long as the interest does not exceed what the lawyer actually incurs, the client agrees in advance, and the rate method is stated in writing.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1997. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current New York Rules of Professional Conduct, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 1997
Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later opinions or rule amendments may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
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 Not binding precedent.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

A lawyer representing personal-injury plaintiffs on contingency advanced litigation expenses (court costs, expert fees, and other disbursements) and borrowed from a bank to finance them. The question was whether the lawyer could charge clients interest on those advances at the bank's rate.

The Committee began with the general restriction on lawyer-to-client loans (DR 5-104(A)) and the near-total bar on litigation loans, but noted the exception in DR 5-103(B)(1) permitting a lawyer to advance or guarantee the expenses of litigation. Although the exception does not address interest, the Committee, agreeing with a uniform line of opinions from other states, concluded that a lawyer may charge interest on such advances, subject to limitations.

The Committee identified three limits: the interest charged may not exceed the interest the lawyer actually incurs; the arrangement must be explained clearly to the client in advance and agreed to; and the method for determining the rate must be stated in a writing provided to the client (DR 2-106(D)). The Committee also flagged, without deciding, that the Appellate Divisions' Rules of Court on contingent-fee personal-injury retainers (22 NYCRR 691.20) may further restrict charging interest on disbursements, and said the lawyer should consider whether the practice is permitted under those rules. Subject to those limits and any applicable legal restrictions, the question was answered in the affirmative.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1997, before New York replaced the Code of Professional Responsibility (the Disciplinary Rules and Ethical Considerations cited here) with the New York Rules of Professional Conduct, effective April 1, 2009. 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.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer charge a client interest on advanced litigation costs?

A: The opinion concluded a lawyer may charge interest on litigation expenses advanced under DR 5-103(B)(1), to recover the lawyer's own borrowing cost, subject to limitations.

Q: How high can the interest rate be?

A: The Committee concluded the interest charged may not exceed the interest the lawyer actually incurs on the funds borrowed to pay the expenses.

Q: What must the client be told?

A: The opinion concluded the arrangement must be explained clearly to the client in advance and agreed to, and the method for determining the rate must be stated in a writing provided to the client (DR 2-106(D)).

Background and rules framework

The opinion was decided under New York's then-governing Code of Professional Responsibility: DR 5-104(A) (business/loan dealings with a client), DR 5-103(B)(1) (advancing the expenses of litigation), and DR 2-106(D) (the contingent-fee writing). The Model Rules analogues are Rule 1.8 (including 1.8(e) on advancing litigation expenses) and Rule 1.5 (fees and the contingent-fee writing). The opinion noted possible further limits under 22 NYCRR 691.20.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • New York Code DR 2-106(D), DR 5-103(B)(1), DR 5-104(A) (Model Rules 1.5, 1.8 analogues)

Court rules:

  • 22 NYCRR 691.20 (Appellate Division contingent-fee retainer rules), noted as possibly restricting the practice

Other opinions cited:

  • N.Y. City Bar Opinion 1993-2 (1993); and opinions from Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maryland, New Jersey, and Virginia

See also

Source

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1997 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current New York Rules of Professional Conduct and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the rules it relies on.