WSBA 1991

Can a lawyer enter a contingent fee agreement that pays a third-party consultant a referral or finder's fee?

Short answer: The committee concluded the proposed transaction would be improper under RPC 5.4 because the agreement would provide for a referral or finder's fee to a nonlawyer.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1991. Ezel answers yours: whether it's allowed on your facts, under the current rules of professional conduct in your state, 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 Not binding precedent.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

A lawyer asked about a contingent fee agreement with a third-party consultant. The committee was of the opinion that the proposed transaction would be improper under RPC 5.4.

The committee's reason was that the agreement would provide for a referral or finder's fee, which RPC 5.4 does not permit between a lawyer and a nonlawyer.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1991, 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 Treat this page as historical context, not current guidance.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: Can a lawyer pay a third-party consultant a referral or finder's fee out of a contingent recovery?

A: No. The committee was of the opinion that the proposed transaction would be improper under RPC 5.4 because the agreement would provide for a referral or finder's fee.

Q: What made the arrangement improper?

A: The committee identified the referral or finder's fee feature of the agreement as the problem under RPC 5.4.

Background and rules framework

The opinion applied RPC 5.4, Washington's rule on the professional independence of a lawyer, which corresponds to ABA Model Rule 5.4 and restricts the sharing of legal fees with nonlawyers. The committee treated the referral or finder's fee to the third-party consultant as falling within that restriction.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

ABA Model Rule 5.4 (professional independence; sharing fees with nonlawyers)
Washington RPC 5.4

Source

Landing page: https://ao.wsba.org/print.aspx?ID=525

Original opinion text

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

Advisory Opinion: 1445
Year Issued: 1991
RPC(s): RPC 5.4
Subject: Contingent fee agreement with third party consultant; referral or finders fee

The Committee reviewed your inquiry concerning a contingent fee agreement with a third-party consultant. The Committee is of the opinion that the proposed transaction would be improper under RPC 5.4 because the agreement would provide for a referral or finders fee.

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1991 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.