Can a lawyer authorize a nonlawyer staff member to use a signature stamp to sign the lawyer's trust-account checks?

Plain-English summary

The inquiry asked whether a lawyer could authorize a staff member to use a signature stamp to sign trust-account checks, with the lawyer's knowledge and direction.

The committee was of the opinion that the practice would not be specifically prohibited by the Rules of Professional Conduct, but that it is very poor and might be so far below the minimal standard of care as to border on incompetence. The committee felt the potential for misuse of a signature stamp on trust-account checks was great, and likened the practice to a lawyer signing trust-account checks in blank and leaving them lying around.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1988, before the 2006 revisions to the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct. The rule then numbered RPC 1.14, governing safekeeping of client property and trust accounts, corresponds to Model Rule 1.15 and was later renumbered and amended. Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance. Verify against current rules before relying on any specific rule mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Does any rule flatly ban letting a nonlawyer use a signature stamp on trust-account checks?

A: Per the opinion, no. The committee was of the opinion that the practice "would not be specifically prohibited by the Rules of Professional Conduct," while still warning against it.

Q: Why did the committee discourage the practice if no rule bans it?

A: The committee was of the opinion that the practice is very poor and might fall so far below the minimal standard of care as to border on incompetence, because the potential for misuse of a signature stamp on trust-account checks is great. It likened the practice to signing trust-account checks in blank and leaving them lying around.

Background and rules framework

The opinion is grounded in the rule then numbered Washington RPC 1.14, corresponding to Model Rule 1.15, which governs the safekeeping of client property and the handling of trust accounts. The committee found no specific prohibition on the signature-stamp practice but tied its concern to the heightened risk of misuse of trust funds, framing the question in terms of the minimal standard of care.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Washington RPC 1.14 (safekeeping of client property; trust accounts), corresponding to Model Rule 1.15.

See also

• WSBA Ethics Op. 1128: handling trust funds held for a client whose whereabouts are unknown
• WSBA Ethics Op. 1066: whether a client can waive the qualified-trust-account requirement

Source

• Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=237

Original opinion text

Reproduced from the official source for research purposes. The linked source is authoritative.

Advisory Opinion: 1157
Year Issued: 1988
RPC(s): RPC 1.14
Subject: Trust account; authorizing nonlawyer assistant to use signature stamp on checks

The Committee was of the opinion that authorizing a member of your staff to use a signature stamp for signature on trust account checks, with your knowledge and direction, would not be specifically prohibited by the Rules of Professional Conduct, but that such a practice is very poor and might be so below the minimal standard of care so as to border on incompetence. The Committee felt that the potential for misuse of a signature stamp on trust account checks was great, and likened it to a lawyer signing trust account checks in blank and leaving them lying around.