Ezel / Ethics Opinions / SBAND

Could a lawyer receive a share of a real estate commission for work tied to legal services on a purchase?

Short answer For the proposed purchase transaction, the committee said the fee arrangement was permissible if it complied with Rule 1.5 generally and Rule 1.5(c) particularly. The short response did not decide the requester’s separate brokerage-licensing assertions.
Bar
SBAND
Issued
May 2, 1989
Source
View Original PDF

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1989. Ask about yours and see what the current North Dakota Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.

How much weight this carries: Under North Dakota Rule for Lawyer Discipline 1.2(B), a lawyer who acts in good faith and in reasonable reliance on a written opinion of the association's ethics committee is not subject to sanction for the conduct the opinion addresses. Source.
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 asked about receiving 25% of a real estate commission after preparing purchase documents and presenting or negotiating them for a commercial buyer. The request asserted that lawyers were exempt from real estate broker licensing.

The committee’s short response addressed the proposed fee arrangement under the professional-conduct rules. It said the arrangement was permissible if consistent with Rule 1.5 generally and Rule 1.5(c) in particular. It did not analyze the asserted licensing exemption or other legal questions in its reply.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1989, before North Dakota's 2006 revisions to its Rules of Professional Conduct. The later North Dakota Opinion 06-05 states: “On August 1, 2006, material changes to N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.10(a) will take effect.” 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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.

Common questions

Q: Did the committee approve the proposed commission unconditionally?

A: No. It conditioned its answer on compliance with Rule 1.5 and Rule 1.5(c).

Q: Did the committee decide the brokerage-licensing issue?

A: Its reply did not address that assertion; it dealt with the fee arrangement under Rule 1.5.

Background and rules framework

The committee cited Rule 1.5 and Rule 1.5(c) for the fee arrangement. The requester mentioned a real estate licensing exemption, but the response did not analyze it.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • Rule 1.5 generally and Rule 1.5(c) particularly, cited as conditions for the proposed fee arrangement.

Source

Original opinion text

Full opinion text unavailable from the official source; see the linked source above for the complete text.

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 1989. Ezel checks the current North Dakota Rules of Professional Conduct against your situation and cites the rules it relies on.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace