OSB August 2005

Can an Oregon lawyer employ a suspended or disbarred lawyer to do work that nonlawyers may lawfully perform?

Short answer: Yes, qualified. A suspended or disbarred lawyer may do work that nonlawyers may lawfully do, but may not practice law and may not receive a share or percentage of legal fees earned on a specific case; other forms of compensation are allowed.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 2005. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current Oregon Rules of Professional Conduct, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 2005
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 Not binding precedent.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 as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original ethics opinion (PDF)

Plain-English summary

A lawyer wishes to employ suspended or disbarred lawyers to assist with functions that do not include giving legal advice and that may lawfully be performed by nonlawyers, such as the work of legal assistants or law clerks. The question is whether the lawyer may do so.

The opinion concludes yes, qualified. It applies Oregon RPC 5.5(a), which bars a lawyer from practicing law in violation of the regulation of the profession or assisting another in doing so, and notes RPC 5.4(a)'s bar on sharing legal fees with a nonlawyer. The opinion states that suspended or disbarred lawyers may not practice law and may not receive a share or percentage of legal fees earned by the lawyer on any specific case, but that this does not preclude other forms of compensation.

The opinion contrasts Application of Kraus (refusing to reinstate a suspended lawyer who continued to practice law during suspension) with State ex rel. Oregon State Bar v. Lenske (dismissing contempt proceedings where a suspended lawyer's client discussions and document drafting were supervised and approved by licensed lawyers), illustrating the line between assisting permitted work and aiding the practice of law.

In practice

Under the Oregon rules as they stood at the time of the opinion, RPC 5.5(a) permitted a lawyer to employ a suspended or disbarred lawyer for tasks nonlawyers may lawfully perform, while RPC 5.4(a) barred sharing legal fees with that person. The opinion holds that the employee may be compensated by means other than a share or percentage of legal fees on a specific case, and may not engage in the practice of law.

Common questions

Q: Can a lawyer hire a suspended or disbarred lawyer at all?

A: Yes, qualified. The opinion concludes the lawyer may employ them for functions that nonlawyers may lawfully perform under RPC 5.5(a).

Q: Can a suspended or disbarred lawyer be paid a percentage of case fees?

A: No. The opinion concludes they may not receive a share or percentage of legal fees earned on a specific case, but other forms of compensation are not precluded.

Q: What may a suspended or disbarred lawyer not do?

A: The opinion concludes they may not practice law; the Lenske contrast shows permitted tasks must be supervised and approved by licensed lawyers.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Oregon RPC 5.5(a) (a lawyer shall not practice law in violation of the regulation of the profession or assist another in doing so) and RPC 5.4(a) (no sharing of legal fees with a nonlawyer). These track Model Rules 5.5 and 5.4.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • Oregon RPC 5.5(a) / Model Rule 5.5 (unauthorized practice; assisting another)
  • Oregon RPC 5.4(a) / Model Rule 5.4 (sharing legal fees with a nonlawyer)

Statutes:

  • ORS 9.160 to 9.166 (practice of law)

Cases:

  • Application of Kraus, 295 Or 743, 670 P2d 1012 (1983)
  • State ex rel. Oregon State Bar v. Lenske, 284 Or 23, 584 P2d 759 (1978)
  • In re Koliha, 330 Or 402, 9 P3d 102 (2000)

See also

Source

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 2005 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Oregon Rules of Professional Conduct and answers your specific situation, with citations.

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