WSBA 1988

May a law firm's buy-out agreement pay a withdrawing shareholder a percentage of fees on the firm's cases?

Short answer: The committee concluded a buy-out may pay a percentage fee tied to the proportion of work the withdrawing shareholder did on each case, but a blanket percentage of every case would violate RPC 1.5(e).

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1988. 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 1988
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.
Disclaimer: Advisory only. Not binding precedent.
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) is the authoritative source for any reliance.

Plain-English summary

The inquiry concerned a buy-out agreement between a professional services corporation and a withdrawing shareholder of the corporation. The committee analyzed the fee arrangement under RPC 1.5(e), Washington's rule on dividing fees.

The committee was of the opinion that the buy-out agreement could provide for a percentage fee to be paid to the withdrawing shareholder, provided that the percentage was reasonable and based on the proportion of work done on each individual case. It was also of the opinion, however, that the agreement could not provide for a blanket percentage division on every case, because that would violate RPC 1.5(e).

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1988, before the 2006 revisions to the Washington Rules of Professional Conduct. 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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 mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Could a buy-out pay the departing shareholder a percentage of case fees?

A: Under this 1988 opinion, yes, if the percentage was reasonable and tied to the proportion of work that shareholder did on each individual case.

Q: What form of percentage was not allowed?

A: A blanket percentage division on every case. The committee found that arrangement would violate RPC 1.5(e).

Background and rules framework

RPC 1.5(e), Washington's counterpart to ABA Model Rule 1.5(e), governs the division of a fee, generally requiring that a division be proportional to the services performed or accompanied by a written assumption of joint responsibility and client consent. The committee applied that proportionality principle to a corporate buy-out, allowing a percentage keyed to work done on each case but rejecting a flat percentage of all cases.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • ABA Model Rule 1.5(e) (division of fees)
  • Washington RPC 1.5(e)

See also

Source

Original opinion text

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

The Committee considered your inquiry concerning a buy-out agreement between a professional services corporation and a withdrawing shareholder of the corporation. The Committee was of the opinion that the buy-out agreement could provide for a percentage fee to be paid to the withdrawing shareholder provided that the percentage was reasonable and based on the proportion of work done on each individual case. The Committee was of the opinion, however, that the agreement could not provide for a blanket percentage division on every case as that would violate RPC 1.5(e).

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1988 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.