Can I charge a contingent fee to collect child support arrearages, or to get an increase in child support?

Plain-English summary

The inquiring attorney asked about the propriety of being paid on a contingency fee basis in connection with the collection of child support arrearages.

The panel took the position that it is proper to use a contingent fee arrangement for the collection of established child support arrearages that are due, but that this type of arrangement would be improper when seeking to obtain increased child support. The panel cited Rule 1.5(d)(1) of the Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct.

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, and it applies Rule 1.5(d)(1) as originally adopted. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 rule mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Can I take a contingent fee to collect child-support arrears?

A: Per the opinion, yes, for the collection of established child support arrearages that are due.

Q: What about a contingent fee to get support increased?

A: Per the opinion, no. A contingent fee arrangement would be improper when the objective is to obtain increased child support.

Q: Which rule did the panel cite?

A: Per the opinion, Rule 1.5(d)(1) of the Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Rhode Island Rule 1.5(d)(1), corresponding to Model Rule 1.5(d)(1), which prohibits a contingent fee in a domestic relations matter where the fee is contingent on securing a divorce or on the amount of alimony, support, or property settlement. The panel drew a line between collecting an already-established arrearage (a liquidated debt), which it treated as permissible, and seeking an increase in support, which falls within the rule's prohibition.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• MR 1.5 (fees)
• RI RPC 1.5(d)(1)

Statutes:

• None cited.

Cases:

• None cited.

Other opinions cited:

• None cited.

See also

• RI EAP Op. 2022-02: A Contingency Fee May Apply to Damages Plus Court-Awarded Attorney Fees
• RI EAP Op. 89-21: One-Third of Gross Settlement Proceeds; Fee Lien on Discharge Invalid
• RI EAP Op. 90-13: Reporting Duty Over Prior Counsel's Lien and Quantum Meruit Fee on Discharge

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%2091-78.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 #91-78
Issued December 4, 1991

An attorney seeks Panel advice as to the propriety of being paid on a contingency fee basis in connection with collection of child support arrearages.

The Panel is of the opinion that it is proper to use a contingent fee arrangement in regard to collection of established child support arrearages due but this type of arrangement would be improper when seeking to obtain increased child support. See Rule 1.5(d)(1) of the Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct.