Could a lawyer pay a suspended lawyer a referral fee for former tax clients, or employ her to help with their returns?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1993. Ask about yours and see what the current North Dakota Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
A suspended lawyer who had prepared tax returns for former clients proposed referring them to another lawyer in exchange for one third of the new billings. The requesting lawyer also asked whether the suspended lawyer could meet those clients, collect tax documents, and deliver them for preparation.
The committee rejected the fee division under North Dakota Rule 1.5(e): the suspended lawyer would perform no legal services and could not assume responsibility for the representation. The committee said Rule 5.4(a) did not apply to these facts and declined to address it further.
The committee also rejected the plan for the suspended lawyer to meet former clients in her office or work at the new lawyer's office when that lawyer was absent. Citing the terms of her suspension, it said she could instead work as a paralegal under the new lawyer's direct supervision and receive a reasonable employee salary, but no referral or finder's fee.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 1993, 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Could the requesting lawyer pay one third of the new tax billings to the suspended lawyer?
A: No. The committee concluded that the described fee split or referral payment violated the conduct rules.
Q: Could the suspended lawyer collect documents from former clients while working in her own office?
A: No. The committee said the described arrangement would conflict with her suspension and could appear to the public as continued tax practice.
Q: What paid work did the committee allow?
A: It said the suspended lawyer could be employed as a paralegal in the requesting lawyer's office, directly supervised, for a reasonable salary.
Background and rules framework
The opinion analyzes North Dakota Rule 1.5(e)'s fee division requirements. It quotes Rule 5.4(a) but says that rule does not apply to the stated arrangement. The committee relies on Disciplinary Action Against Larson, 485 N.W.2d 345 (N.D. 1992), for the suspended lawyer's work restrictions.
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- North Dakota Rule 1.5(e), division of fees between lawyers.
- North Dakota Rule 5.4(a), quoted but found inapplicable.
Cases:
- Disciplinary Action Against Larson, 485 N.W.2d 345 (N.D. 1992).
See also
Source
- Landing page: https://www.sband.org/page/ethics_opinions
- Original PDF: https://web.archive.org/web/20250000000000id_/https://www.sband.org/resource/resmgr/docs/for_lawyers/93-01.pdf
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 1993. 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