Must a contingent fee agreement state that the lawyer offered the client the option of paying an hourly rate?

Short answer The committee was of the opinion that nothing in the Rules of Professional Conduct imposes a duty to recite in a contingent fee agreement that the client had been offered an hourly rate.

Bar

WSBA

Issued

1990

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1990. Ask about yours and see what the current Washington Rules of Professional Conduct says for your facts, with citations.

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 Not binding precedent.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 asked whether a lawyer must recite in a contingent fee agreement that the client had been offered the option to pay an hourly rate. The committee was of the opinion that nothing in the Rules of Professional Conduct imposed that duty on a lawyer.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1990, 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Does a contingent fee agreement have to mention that an hourly rate was offered?

A: Under this 1990 opinion, no; the committee was of the opinion that nothing in the rules imposes that duty.

Q: Which rule did the committee key the question to?

A: The committee's subject line referenced RPC 1.5(a)(8), the contingent-fee and fee-reasonableness rule.

Background and rules framework

At the time of this opinion, Washington's RPC 1.5 governed fees, including contingent fee arrangements, the subject the Model Rules place in Rule 1.5. The committee found no provision requiring a contingent fee agreement to disclose that the client had been offered an hourly-rate alternative.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

ABA Model Rule 1.5 (fees; contingent fees)
Washington RPC 1.5(a)(8)

Source

Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=446

Original opinion text

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

The Committee reviewed your inquiry concerning whether a lawyer needs to recite in a contingent fee agreement that the client had been offered to pay an hourly rate and was of the opinion that nothing in the Rules of Professional Conduct imposed that duty on a lawyer.

What do the rules say today, for your facts?

This opinion is from 1990. Ezel checks the current Washington 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