I left the firm where I was an associate. Can I sue a delinquent client for my share of the fee, do I still have to show up for the firm's clients, and can I be forced to keep representing them?

Plain-English summary

Attorney A had been an associate in Attorney B's firm, compensated with a base salary plus 50% of the fee for any case in which A participated. A was no longer associated with B, and certain legal bills that accrued during A's employment had become severely delinquent. A submitted three questions.

On the first question, whether A may sue a severely delinquent client for A's share of the delinquent legal bills, the panel cited Rule 2 ("Jurisdiction") of the Rules of the Rhode Island Supreme Court Ethics Advisory Panel, which allows the panel to decline an opinion where it would require resolution of questions of substantive law outside legal ethics and discipline. The panel found the question presented a legal rather than an ethical question and declined to address it.

On the second question, whether A must appear at scheduled court and adversarial proceedings for the firm's clients, the panel took the position that once an attorney has entered an appearance on behalf of a client, the attorney can withdraw only with the permission of the court, or if the attorney is discharged by the client and allowed to withdraw by the court.

On the third question, whether A may be compelled to represent the firm's clients A had represented while employed, the panel took the position that if the clients are clients of Attorney B's firm, they are no longer A's responsibility once A leaves B's employ. The panel noted, however, that any clients of the firm who were brought to the firm by A may remain clients of A.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1991, after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988. The Rhode Island Supreme Court later revised the Rules of Professional Conduct in 2007 as part of the nationwide Ethics 2000 process, which renumbered and amended several provisions. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 guidance mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Will the panel opine on whether I can sue a client for my share of an unpaid fee after leaving the firm?

A: No. The panel cited its Rule 2 jurisdiction and declined, finding the fee-suit question a legal rather than an ethical question.

Q: After I leave the firm, do I still have to appear at scheduled proceedings for clients where I entered an appearance?

A: Per the opinion, once an appearance is entered the attorney can withdraw only with the court's permission, or if the client discharges the attorney and the court allows withdrawal.

Q: Can I be compelled to keep representing the firm's clients I handled as an associate?

A: Under this opinion, clients who are the firm's clients are no longer your responsibility once you leave, but clients you brought to the firm may remain your clients.

Background and rules framework

The opinion is framed by the panel's own jurisdictional rule rather than a numbered Rule of Professional Conduct. Rule 2 ("Jurisdiction") of the Rules of the Rhode Island Supreme Court Ethics Advisory Panel lets the panel decline an opinion that would require resolving substantive law outside ethics and discipline, which the panel invoked to decline the fee-suit question. The withdrawal and client-responsibility answers are stated as the panel's positions on the associate's prospective conduct after leaving the firm.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• None cited. The panel relied on Rule 2 ("Jurisdiction") of the Rules of the Rhode Island Supreme Court Ethics Advisory Panel to decline the first question.

Statutes:

• None cited.

Cases:

• None cited.

Other opinions cited:

• None cited.

See also

• RI EAP Op. 91-08: Panel Declines a Matter Not Governed by the Rules
• RI EAP Op. 91-31: Lawyer as Witness in a Real Estate Dispute

Source

• Landing page: https://www.courts.ri.gov/attorney-resources/Pages/Ethics-Advisory-Panel-default.aspx
• Original PDF: https://www.courts.ri.gov/Opinions/EAP%2091-35.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

Digest of Ethics Advisory Panel
Opinion #91-35, Request #160
Issued May 23, 1991

An attorney seeks Panel advice concerning three ethical questions the attorney has submitted to the Panel.

The pertinent facts are as follows:

Attorney A was employed by Attorney B as an associate in the firm of Attorney B. Attorney A was to be paid a base salary of $10,000 and would receive 50% of the fee for any case in which he/she participated. Attorney A is no longer associated with Attorney B. Certain legal bills which accrued during the course of A's employment with B have become severely delinquent.

The attorney poses the following questions:

1. May Attorney A bring suit against a severely delinquent client for Attorney A's share of the delinquent legal bills?

2. Is Attorney A under any obligation to appear at scheduled court and other adversarial proceedings on behalf of clients of Attorney B's firm now that Attorney A is no longer associated with Attorney B?

3. May Attorney A be compelled to represent clients of Attorney B's firm whom he/she represented while an employee of Attorney B's firm.

In response to the first question, the Panel cites Rule 2 of the Rules of the Rhode Island Supreme Court Ethics Advisory Panel. Rule 2, entitled "Jurisdiction", states in pertinent part:

The Panel shall accept requests from any member of the Rhode Island Bar in good standing concerning his or her prospective conduct as an attorney under the Rules of Professional Conduct as set forth in Supreme Court Rule 47. The Panel may decline to render an advisory opinion if any of the following circumstances exist:

(g) The opinion would require resolution of questions concerning substantive law outside the area of legal ethics and discipline.

The Panel is of the opinion that the first question presents a legal rather than an ethical question. Therefore, the Panel declines to address that question.

In response to your second question, the Panel takes the position that once an attorney has entered an appearance on behalf of a client, the attorney can withdraw from representation of that client only with the permission of the court or if the attorney is discharged by the client and allowed to withdraw by the court.

Page Two
91-35

In response to the final question, the Panel takes the position that if the clients are clients of Attorney B's firm, these clients are no longer the responsibility of Attorney A once Attorney A leaves the employ of Attorney B. The Panel notes, however, that any clients of Attorney B's firm who are brought to the firm by Attorney A may remain clients of Attorney A.

Ethics Advisory Panel advice is protective in nature. There is no requirement that an attorney abide by a Panel opinion, but if he or she does, he or she is fully protected from any charge of impropriety.