RIEAP January 14, 1992

Can I charge a contingent fee to collect past-due alimony and child support, and can I co-sign a loan so my client can pay my fee?

Short answer: The panel concluded that a contingent fee is proper for collecting past-due alimony and past-due child support but improper when seeking to obtain increased alimony or child support (Rule 1.5(d)(1)), and that under Rule 1.8(j) an attorney may assist the client in obtaining a loan but cannot be a co-signor of the note.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1992. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current rules of professional conduct in your state, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 1992
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.
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

The inquiring attorney asked about the appropriateness of a contingency fee arrangement in collecting past-due alimony and past-due child support, and about the appropriateness of co-signing a loan for a client that would enable the client to pay the legal fee.

On the first question, the panel took the position that it is proper to use a contingent fee arrangement for the collection of past-due alimony as well as past-due child support, but that this type of arrangement would be improper when seeking to obtain increased alimony or increased child support, citing Rule 1.5(d)(1) of the Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct.

On the second question, the panel took the position that under Rule 1.8(j) an attorney may assist the client in obtaining a loan but cannot be a co-signor of the note.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1992, after the Rhode Island Supreme Court adopted the Model Rules of Professional Conduct effective November 15, 1988, and it applies Rules 1.5(d)(1) and 1.8(j) as Rhode Island numbered them at the time. 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, including the rule on financial assistance to clients. 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 past-due support?

A: Per the opinion, yes, for the collection of past-due alimony and past-due child support.

Q: Can I take 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 alimony or child support, under Rule 1.5(d)(1).

Q: Can I co-sign my client's loan so the client can pay my fee?

A: Per the opinion, no. Under Rule 1.8(j) the attorney may assist the client in obtaining a loan but cannot be a co-signor of the note.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applies Rhode Island Rules 1.5(d)(1) and 1.8(j), corresponding to Model Rules 1.5 (fees) and 1.8 (conflict of interest: current clients, specific rules). Rule 1.5(d)(1) prohibits contingent fees in domestic relations matters tied to securing a divorce or the amount of alimony, support, or property settlement; the panel treated collecting an existing arrearage as outside that bar but seeking an increase as within it. Rule 1.8(j), as Rhode Island then numbered it, governs the attorney's financial dealings with a client; the panel read it to allow helping the client obtain a loan while forbidding the attorney from co-signing the note.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • MR 1.5 (fees)
  • MR 1.8 (conflict of interest: current clients, specific rules)
  • RI RPC 1.5(d)(1), RI RPC 1.8(j)

Statutes:

  • None cited.

Cases:

  • None cited.

Other opinions cited:

  • None cited.

See also

Source

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 #92-2, Request #199
Issued January 14, 1992

An attorney seeks Panel advice concerning the appropriateness of a contingency fee arrangement in collecting past due alimony and past due child support and also the appropriateness of co-signing a loan for a client which will enable the client to pay the legal fee.

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

In connection with the second inquiry, the Panel takes the position that under Rule 1.8(j) an attorney may assist the client in obtaining a loan but cannot be a co-signor of the note.

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1992 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current rules of professional conduct in your state and answers your specific situation, with citations.

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