What did withdrawn Vermont Opinion 96-10 say about unidentified funds in a dormant IOLTA account?
Apply this to your situation
This page answers the general question as of 1996. Ask about yours and see what the current Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct say for your facts, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Withdrawn: The official PDF states that Advisory Ethics Opinion 98-09 withdrew this opinion. The conclusion below describes only the withdrawn document's historical position.
A lawyer inherited a dormant IOLTA account after a partnership dissolved and could not determine which clients owned its balance, despite efforts to identify them. The committee said former DR 9-102 required segregation, records, notice, and accounting; it found the predecessor firm's failure to identify the funds breached the recordkeeping requirement.
Because the rule supplied no specific disposition for funds whose owner could no longer be identified, the committee proposed transfer to the Vermont Bar Foundation. It expressly said this would neither cure the earlier recordkeeping breach nor remove any later duty to repay an owner who came forward.
Currency note
The official PDF marks Opinion 96-10 withdrawn by Opinion 98-09. This 1996 opinion also predates Vermont's Rules of Professional Conduct, which the Vermont Supreme Court's rules history says applied to lawyer conduct after September 1, 1999. It is historical context only.
Common questions
Q: Is Opinion 96-10 still in force?
A: No. The official PDF itself says Opinion 98-09 withdrew it.
Q: What did the withdrawn opinion say about repayment?
A: It said transferring the funds to the foundation would not eliminate a possible obligation to repay a client or third party who later claimed them.
Background and rules framework
The withdrawn opinion discussed former DR 9-102's trust-record duties and DR 9-103's direction of pooled account interest to the Vermont Bar Foundation. It acknowledged that DR 9-103 authorized interest payments, not the transfer of unidentified principal proposed in its conclusion.
Citations and references
Rules of Professional Conduct:
- Vermont Code of Professional Responsibility DR 9-102 and DR 9-103
Other opinions cited:
- Vermont Advisory Ethics Opinion 98-09, which withdrew this opinion
See also
Source
- Landing page: Vermont Bar Association fees opinions
- Original PDF: Opinion 96-10, marked withdrawn
- Withdrawal opinion: Opinion 98-09
- Vermont Supreme Court rules history, “These rules apply to lawyer conduct after September 1, 1999.”
What do the rules say today, for your facts?
This opinion is from 1996. Ezel checks the current Vermont 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