WSBA 1989

May a law firm join a referral arrangement where a corporation collects monthly fees from members and refers them to the firm for a free half-hour and a 10% discount?

Short answer: The committee, with one dissent, was of the opinion that the proposal would violate RPC 7.2(c) because the lawyer being part of the package the corporation sold constituted something of value given to the corporation that enabled it to charge fees from its members.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1989. 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 1989
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 Not binding precedent.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

A corporation formed by an insurance agent would provide referrals for services to certain contract engineers in return for the engineers paying a monthly fee to the corporation. Among other things, the corporation would refer its engineer members to the inquiring law firm on the condition that the firm would provide the members a free half-hour initial interview and a 10% discount from its regular hourly rates.

The committee, with one dissent, was of the opinion that such a proposal would violate RPC 7.2(c) because the fact that the lawyer was part of the package being sold by the corporation constituted something of value given to the corporation, enabling it to charge fees from its members.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1989, before the Washington State Bar Association's adoption of 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Can a firm be the referred provider in a corporation's paid membership package?

A: Under this 1989 opinion, the committee (with one dissent) concluded the arrangement would violate RPC 7.2(c).

Q: Why did the committee find a violation?

A: Because the lawyer being part of the package the corporation sold was something of value given to the corporation that enabled it to charge fees from its members.

Q: Was the decision unanimous?

A: No. The committee noted one dissent.

Background and rules framework

RPC 7.2(c), Washington's then-current version of the ABA Model Rule 7.2 prohibition, bars a lawyer from giving anything of value to a person for recommending the lawyer's services. The committee reasoned that the lawyer's inclusion in the corporation's fee-generating package was itself a thing of value supplied to the corporation, bringing the arrangement within the prohibition.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

  • ABA Model Rule 7.2 (advertising; giving anything of value for recommending services)
  • Washington RPC 7.2(c)

See also

Source

Original opinion text

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

The Committee understood your inquiry to concern a proposal whereby a corporation formed by an insurance agent would provide referrals for services to certain contract engineers in return for the engineers paying a monthly fee to the corporation. Among others, the corporation would refer its engineer members to your law firm on the condition that you would provide the members a free 1/2 hour initial interview and a discount of 10% from your regular hourly rates. The Committee, with one dissent, was of the opinion that such a proposal would violate RPC 7.2(c) because the fact that the lawyer was part of the package being sold by the corporation constituted something of value given to the corporation enabling it to charge fees from its members.

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1989 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.